MacArthur comments online. Study bible with commentary by john mc arthur. Historical background and background of writing
1:1‑18 These verses constitute the prologue. He introduces many of the main themes that John will consider, especially the main one, that “Jesus is the Christ the Son of God” (vv. 12-14, 18; cf. 20:31). There are many key words that are repeated throughout the gospel (for example, life, light, testimony, glory). The subsequent content of the Gospel develops the theme of the prologue about how the Eternal Word of God, Jesus - the Messiah and the Son of God, became flesh and served among people so that all who believe in Him might be saved. Although the prologue was written by John in the simplest language in the New Testament, it conveys the deepest truths. The prologue presents six basic truths about Christ as the Son of God: 1) the eternal Christ (vv. 1-3); 2) the incarnate Christ (vv. 4, 5); 3) the forerunner of Christ (vv. 6-8); 4) the unrecognized Christ (vv. 9-11); 5) the almighty Christ (vv. 12, 13) and 6) the glorious Christ (vv. 14-18).
1: 1 At the beginning Unlike 1In. 1: 1, where John used a similar phrase (“from the beginning”) to communicate the starting point of Jesus' ministry and the preaching of the gospel, this phrase draws a parallel with Gen. 1: 1 where the same expression is used. John used this phrase in an absolute sense to refer to the beginning of the existence of the material universe in time and space. It was The Verb highlights the pre-eternal existence of the Word, i.e. Jesus Christ. Before the beginning of the existence of the universe, there has always been a Second Person of the Trinity, i.e. He has always been (cf. 8:58). This word is used in opposition to the verb "beginning to be" in vv. 3, which means the beginning in time. John did not include the genealogy that Matthew and Luke have because it reflects the theme that Jesus Christ is the eternal God, the Second Person of the Trinity. Whereas from the point of view of His human nature, He had a human genealogy, from the point of view of His divine nature, He did not have a genealogy. The Word John borrowed the term “Word” not only from Old Testament terminology, but also from Greek philosophy, in which the expression was essentially impersonal, meaning the intelligent root cause of “divine reason,” “intellect,” or even “wisdom.” However, John filled the term exclusively with the Old Testament and Christian meaning (for example, Gen. 1: 3, where the Word of God created the world; Ps. 32: 6; 106: 20; Pro. 8:27, where the Word of God is His powerful self-expression in creation, wisdom, revelation and salvation) and made it a reference to the Personality, i.e. Jesus Christ. Therefore, Greek philosophy is not the exclusive foundation of John's thought. From a strategic point of view, the term “Word” serves as a bridge word to reach not only the Jews, but also the unsaved Greeks. John chose this concept because it was familiar to both Jews and Greeks. ... and the Word was with God The Word, being the Second Person of the Trinity, has been in close communion with God the Father for all eternity. However, although the Word, together with the Father, possessed the splendor of heaven and eternity (Isa. 6: 1-13; cf. 12:41; 17: 5), It readily abandoned the glory of heaven, assuming the form of a man, and was subjected to death on the cross (see notes on Phil. 2: 6-8). was god In Greek, the construction emphasizes that the Word possessed all the essence or attributes of God, i.e. Jesus the Messiah was completely God (cf. Col. 2: 9). Even during His incarnation, when He humbled Himself, He did not cease to be God, but, having assumed the real human nature - the body, - He voluntarily renounced the independent manifestation of God's properties.
1: 3 All things came into being through Him Jesus Christ was the Representative of God the Father who participated in the creation of everything in the universe (Col. 1:16, 17; Heb. 1: 2).
1: 4, 5 life ... light ... darkness John introduces readers to opposing themes that are found throughout the gospel. “Life” and “light” are qualities of the Word, inherent not only to God (5:26), but also to those people who respond to the preaching of the Gospel about Jesus Christ (8:12; 9: 5; 10:28; 11: 25; 14: 6). The Gospel of John uses the word “life” about 36 times — far more than any other book in the New Testament. In a broad sense, it speaks not only of the physical (temporary) life that the Son gave to the created world during His participation in this creation (v. 3), but mainly about the spiritual (eternal) life transmitted as a gift through faith in Him ( 3:15; 17: 3; Eph. 2: 5). "Light" and "darkness" are familiar symbols in Scripture. Intellectually, “light” refers to biblical truth, and “darkness” means delusion or deception (cf. Ps. 119: 105; Prov. 6:23). Morally, “light” refers to holiness or purity (1 John 1: 5), while “darkness” refers to sin or wrongdoing (3:19; 12:35, 46; Rom. 13: 11-14; 1 Thess. 5: 4-7; 1 John 1: 6; 2: 8-11). In relation to Satan, who currently rules the spiritually dark world, as “the prince of dominion in the air”, contributing to spiritual darkness and rebellion against God (Eph. 2: 2), and his demonic army (1 John 5:19) “ darkness ”has a special meaning. Of the 17 occurrences of the expression “darkness” in the New Testament, John uses it 14 times (8 in the Gospel, and 6 in the 1st Epistle), making it almost exclusively a John word. In relation to Jesus Christ, the Word, the expressions “life” and “light” also have their own special meaning (v. 9; 9: 5; 1 John 1: 5-7; 5:12, 20).
1: 5 did not understand The meaning of this word is best conveyed as “did not overcome”. Darkness is not able to conquer or conquer the light. Just as one candle can overcome the darkness that filled a room, the Person and the works of the Son (His death on the cross; cf. 19: 11a) overcome the powers of darkness.
1: 6 Sent From God As the forerunner of Jesus, John had to testify of Him as the Messiah and the Son of God. With the ministry of John ended "400 years of silence" between the end of the Old Testament and the beginning of the New Testament period, when God did not give His revelation. John In this Gospel, the name “John” always refers to John the Baptist, and not to the Apostle John. Unlike other Gospels, where an additional description is used to identify him (Matthew 3: 1; Mark 1: 4; Luke 7:20), the author of this Gospel simply calls him "John" without the word "Baptist". Moreover, the Apostle John (or the son of Zebedee) never mentioned himself directly by his name anywhere in the Gospel, although he was one of the three closest friends of Jesus (Matt. 17: 1). Such silence proves strongly that the Apostle John wrote this Gospel and that his readers knew perfectly well that he had composed the Gospel that bears his name. For more information on John the Baptist, cf. Mt. 3: 1-6; Mk. 1: 2-6; OK. 1: 5-25; 57-80.
1: 7 testimony ... testifying This Gospel emphasizes the words “testify” or “testify,” reflecting the language of the courtroom in the Old Testament, where the truth of the case was to be supported by multiple testimonies (8:17, 18; cf. Deut. 17: 6; 19: 15). Not only John the Baptist testified about Jesus as the Messiah and the Son of God (vv. 19-34; 3: 27-30; 5:35), but there were also other witnesses: 1) the Samaritan woman (4:29); 2) the works of Jesus (10:25); 3) Father (5: 32-37); 4) Old Testament (5:39, 40); 5) the people (12:17) and 6) the Holy Spirit (15:26, 27). that all may believe through him The word “him” does not refer to Christ, but to John as the mediator who testified of Christ. The purpose of his testimony was to induce faith in Jesus Christ as the Savior of the world.
1: 8 He was not light While John the Baptist was the subject of faith, Jesus Christ is the object of faith. Although John's personality and ministry were vital (Matt. 11:11), he was only a forerunner, heralding the coming of the Messiah. Many years after John's ministry and death, many people failed to understand John's subordinate role in relation to Jesus (Acts 19: 1-3).
1: 9 true light ... coming into the world The preferred translation is given in a footnote in the margin. The words “coming into the world” would be grammatically more correct to refer to the word “Light”, and not “every person” and, thus, translate “the true Light that comes into the world enlightens every person”. This highlights the incarnation of Jesus Christ (v. 14; 3:16). enlightens every person Every person is given enough light by God's sovereign authority to be accountable. Through general revelation in creation and conscience, God has implanted His knowledge in man. However, general revelation does not produce salvation, but either brings about the perfect light of Jesus Christ or brings condemnation to those who reject such “light” (see notes on Romans 1:19, 20; 2: 12-16). With the coming of Jesus Christ, the light that God placed within the human heart was fulfilled and embodied. peace The main meaning of this word in Greek, meaning decoration, is explained by the word "external" (1 Pet. 3: 3). While this expression is used a total of 185 times in the New Testament, John showed a special love for this word, using it 78 times in his Gospel, 24 times in the Epistles and 3 times in Revelation. John gives several shades of its meaning: 1) the created physical universe (v. 9; cf. v. 3; 21:24, 25); 2) humanity in general (3:16; 6:32, 51; 12:19) and 3) the invisible spiritual world of evil, which is in the power of Satan, and all that he offers, enmity against God, His Word and His people (3 : 19; 4:42; 7: 7; 14:17, 22, 27, 30; 15:18, 19; 16: 8, 20, 33; 17: 6, 9, 14; cf. 1 Cor. 1:21 ; 2 Cor. 4: 4; 2 Pet. 1: 4; 1 John 5:19). The latter concept is a fundamentally new meaning that the term acquires in the New Testament and which predominates in John. Thus, in most cases, John uses this word with a certain negative connotation.
1:11 to His ... His The first expression “to His own” most likely refers to humanity as a whole, and the second to the Jewish people. As the Creator, the world belongs to the Word as property, but due to spiritual blindness, the world did not even recognize Him (cf. also v. 10). John used the second word "his" in a narrower sense to refer to the physical origin of Jesus, the Jews. Despite the fact that they had the Scripture testifying of His Person and coming, they still did not receive Him (Isa. 65: 2, 3; Jer. 7:25). The Gospel of John pays special attention to the theme of rejection by the Jews of the promised Messiah (12: 37-41).
1:12, 13 These verses are contrasted with verses 10, 11. John softens the general rejection of the Messiah by emphasizing the presence of a believing remnant. This book is previewed here, since the first 12 chapters in it emphasize the rejection of Christ, and ch. 13-21 are focused on the believing remnant who received Him.
1:12 who received him, believing in his name The second phrase clarifies the first. To accept Him - the Word of God - is to acknowledge His claims, to believe in Him, and thus to be loyal to Him. gave This word emphasizes that the grace of God is drawn to participate in the gift of salvation (cf. Eph. 2: 8-10). power Those who receive Jesus - the Word - are given full authority to claim the exalted title of "children of God." his name The expression signifies the nature of the Personality Himself. See notes for 14:13, 14.
1:13 from God God's side of salvation: Ultimately, salvation comes from God's will, not from man's (cf. 3: 6-8; Tit. 3: 5; 1 John 2:29).
1:14 The Word was made flesh Since Christ, being God, was not eternal and uncreated (see explanation on v. 1), the word “became” emphasizes Christ's acceptance of the flesh of man (cf. Heb. 1: 1-3; 2: 14-18). Undoubtedly, of all the facts, this is the most difficult to understand, since it testifies that Infinity became finite, Eternity was subject to time; The invisible became the visible; the supernatural Personality turned Himself into a natural one. However, during the incarnation, the Word did not cease to be God, but became God in human flesh, i.e. the former God, but in human form (1 Tim. 3:16). inhabited The phrase means "to put up a tabernacle" or "live in a tent." This expression is reminiscent of the Old Testament tabernacle where God communicated with Israel before the temple was built (Ex. 25: 8). It was called the “tabernacle of the congregation” (Ex. 33: 7), or “the tabernacle of the testimony” (in the Septuagint), where “the Lord spoke to Moses face to face, as one would speak to his friend” (Ex. 33:11). During the New Testament, God chose to dwell among His people in an exclusively personal way, becoming a man. In the Old Testament, we read that when the tabernacle was completed, the cloud of God's presence (or shechinah) filled the entire structure (Ex. 40:34; cf. 1 Kings 8:10). When the Word was made flesh, the glorious presence of God was embodied in Him (cf. Col. 2: 9). we have seen his glory Despite the fact that His essence of God was hidden in human flesh, there is evidence in the Gospels of His God's greatness. The disciples saw the radiance of His glory on the Mount of Transfiguration (Matthew 17: 1-8). However, the reference to the glory of Christ was not only visible but also spiritual. They saw in Him manifestations of the attributes or characteristics of God (mercy, generosity, philanthropy, wisdom, truth, etc .; cf. Ex. 33: 18-23). glory as ... from the Father Jesus, as God, showed the same perfect glory as the Father. They are one by nature (cf. 5: 17-30; 8:19; 10:30). only begotten The expression "only begotten" does not accurately translate the Greek word. It is not identical with the term meaning "to produce", but, on the contrary, has the meaning of "only beloved." Therefore, it reflects the idea of someone's exclusivity, uniqueness and testifies that someone is loved like no one else. With this word, John emphasized the special nature of the relationship between the Father and the Son in God (cf. 3:16, 18; 1 John 4: 9). It has the added value not of origin, but of unique prominence; for example, this word was used to refer to Isaac (Heb. 11:17), who was the second son of Abraham (the first was Ishmael; cf. Gen. 16:15 with Gen. 21: 2, 3). full of grace and truth Probably John was referring to Ex. 33, 34. There Moses asked God to show him His glory. The Lord replied to Moses that He would spend all His “glory” before him, and then, passing by, God proclaimed: “The Lord ... is loving and merciful, longsuffering and many-merciful and true” (Ex. 33:18, 19; 34: 5 -7). These attributes of the glory of God emphasize the mercy of God's character, especially with regard to salvation. Jesus, being the God of the Old Testament (8:58; “I AM”), manifested the same attributes of God when He dwelt among people in the New Testament era (Col. 2: 9).
1:15 The testimony of John the Baptist confirms the assertion of the apostle John about the eternity of the Incarnate Word (cf. v. 14).
1:16 grace for grace This phrase emphasizes the abundance of grace shown by God to humanity, especially to believers (Eph. 1: 5-8; 2: 7).
1:17, 18 These verses, confirming the truth in v. 14 are final in contrast to the prologue. The law given to Moses was not a manifestation of God's mercy, but was God's requirement of holiness. He acted as a way to visually demonstrate the sinfulness of man and pointed to the need for a Savior, Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:19, 20; Gal. 3: 10-14, 21-26). God gave the law. Moreover, the law revealed only part of the truth and was of a preparatory nature. The real essence or complete truth that the law indicated came through the Person of Jesus Christ.
1:18 who is in the bosom of the Father The expression denotes the closeness, love, and understanding found in the Triune God (13:23; Luke 16:22, 23). revealed From this word, theologians have formed the term "exegesis", or "interpretation." John meant that everything that is in Jesus and everything that He does reveals and explains who God is and what He does (14: 8-10).
1:19‑37 In these verses, John, reinforcing his main theme (20:30, 31), presented the first of many witnesses to prove that Jesus is the Messiah and the Son of God. John the Baptist testified for three days to different groups of people (cf. vv. 29, 35, 36). Each time he spoke of Christ in different ways and emphasized His special aspects. The events described in these verses took place in AD 26/27, just a few months after John's baptism of Jesus (cf. Matt. 3: 13-17; Luke 3:21, 22).
1:19 John John, who was born into a family of priests, belonged to the tribe of Levi (Luke 1: 5). When he was about 29 or 30 years old, he began his ministry in the Jordan Valley and boldly proclaimed the need for spiritual repentance and preparation for the coming of the Messiah. He was a cousin of Jesus Christ and fulfilled the designation of His prophetic forerunner (Matt. 3: 3; Luke 1: 5-25, 36). Jews ... from Jerusalem Here, perhaps, we are talking about the Sanhedrin, the main governing body of the Jewish people. The Sanhedrin was ruled by a high priest's family, so the messengers will naturally be priests and Levites who have an interest in John's ministry, preaching, and baptism.
1:20 i am not the christ Some thought John was the Messiah (Luke 3: 15-17). Christ The word "Christ" is the Greek equivalent for the Hebrew term "Messiah."
1:21 are you Elijah? The prophet Malachi in 4: 5 (see explanation ibid.) Promises that the prophet Elijah will return before the Messiah establishes His earthly Kingdom. They asked if John was the forerunner of the Messiah, was he Elijah? In announcing the birth of John, the angel said that John would come before Jesus “in the spirit and power of Elijah” (Luke 1:17), thus indicating that the prophecy could not be fulfilled literally by Elijah, but by someone else. God sent John, who was like Elijah, i.e. a person who had the same type of ministry, the same power and similar personality traits (2 Kings 1: 8; cf. Matt. 3: 4). And if Jesus came as the Messiah, then John probably fulfilled this prophecy (see explanations for Matthew 11:14; Mark 9:13; Luke 1:17; Rev. 11: 5, 6). Prophet? Here is a reference to Deut. 18: 15-18, which predicted that God would raise up a great prophet like Moses who would act as His voice. While some people in John's time interpreted this prophecy as referring to another forerunner of the Messiah, the New Testament (Acts 3:22, 23; 7:37) refers this passage to Jesus.
1:23 John quoted and referred to Isa. 40: 3 (cf. Matt 3: 3; Mark 1: 3; Luke 3: 4). In the context of the original Is. 40: 3 The prophet heard a voice calling to make a straight path through the eastern wilderness so that the God of Israel could bring His people home from Babylonian captivity. This call was a prophetic description that foreshadowed Israel's final and greatest return to her God from spiritual darkness and alienation through the spiritual liberation accomplished by the Messiah (cf. Rom. 11: 25-27). In humility, John compared himself to a voice rather than a man, thus focusing exclusively on Christ (cf. Luke 17:10).
1:25 christening Since John simply called himself a voice (v. 24), the question arose about his authority to perform baptism. The Old Testament linked the coming of the Messiah with repentance and spiritual cleansing (Ezek. 36, 37; Zech. 13: 1). John focused on his position as the forerunner of the Messiah. He used the customary baptism of proselytes for the Jews as a sign of the need to acknowledge that they too are outside God's saving covenant, like the Gentiles. Before the coming of the Messiah, they also needed spiritual cleansing and preparation (repentance - Matthew 3:11; Mark 1: 4; Luke 3: 7, 8). See explanations for Matt. 3: 6, 11, 16, 17 to explain the meaning of the baptism by John.
1:27 Here the words of John the Baptist continue the theme of the Messiah's superiority over him, touched upon in the prologue (vv. 6-8, 15), and show his amazing humility. Whenever John had the opportunity to focus on himself in such meetings, he turned his attention instead to the Messiah. John resigned himself to claiming that he - unlike a slave who was required to take off his master's shoes - was not even worthy to perform this act on the Messiah.
1:28 Bethavare This word replaces the original word “Bethany”, as some believe that John mistakenly named Bethany as the site of these events. The explanation is that there were two Bethany, i.e. one near Jerusalem, where Mary, Martha and Lazarus lived (11: 1), and the other “near Jordan” near the area of Galilee. Since John made great efforts to name the immediate proximity to Jerusalem of another Bethany, here he most likely referred to another city with the same name.
1:29‑34 This section refers to John's testimony of Jesus to another group of Jews the next day (see vv. 19-28 for information on the first group and day). This section forms a kind of bridge. It continues the theme of the testimony of John the Baptist, but also presents an extensive list of names related to Jesus: Lamb of God (v. 29, 36), Rabbi / Teacher (v. 38, 49) Messiah / Christ (v. 41), Son of God (v. 34, 49), the King of Israel (v. 49), the Son of Man (v. 51), and "He whom Moses wrote about in the law and the prophets" (v. 45).
1:29 The next day This phrase probably refers to the day after John answered the delegation from Jerusalem. It also begins the sequence of days (v. 43; 2: 1), ending with a miracle in Cana (2: 1-11). Lamb of god The use of the lamb for sacrifice was extremely clear to the Jews. The Lamb was sacrificed during the Passover (Ex. 12: 1-36); in the prophecies of Isaiah the lamb was led to the slaughter (Isa. 53: 7); Israel offered the lamb in daily sacrifices (Lev. 14: 12-21; cf. Heb. 10: 5-7). John the Baptist used this expression as a reference to Jesus' final sacrifice on the cross to atone for the sins of the entire world. This is a theme that the Apostle John pursues in all of his writings (19:36; cf. Rev. 5: 1-6; 7:17; 17:14) and which is found in other books of the New Testament (for example, 1 Pet. 1:19 ). sin of the world See explanation to Art. nine; Wed 3:16; 6:33, 51. In this context, “peace” refers to humanity in general, not specifically each person. The use of the singular for “sin” in conjunction with the word for peace indicates that Jesus' sacrifice for sin potentially extends to all people without exception (cf. 1 John 2: 2). However, John makes it clear that it is effective only for those who have received Christ (vv. 11, 12). For a discussion of the description of Christ's death for the sake of this world, see the note on 2 Cor. 5:19.
1:31 i didn't know him Although John was a relative of Jesus, he did not know Jesus as the “Coming One” or the “Messiah” (v. 30).
1:32 Spirit descending Prior to this, God had told John that this sign would have to point to the promised Messiah (v. 33). Therefore, when John testified of what was happening, he was able to identify Jesus as the Messiah (cf. Matt. 3:16; Mark. 1:10; Luke 3:22).
1:34 Son of God Although believers in a narrow sense may be called “sons of God” (eg, v. 12; Matt. 5: 9; Rom. 8:14), John uses this expression with the full power of a calling, which indicates a unique unity and the closeness that Jesus maintains with the Father as "the Son." The term conveys the idea of God's essence of Jesus as the Messiah (v. 49; 5: 16-30; cf. 2 Sam. 7:14; Ps. 2: 7; see notes on Heb. 1: 1-9).
1:35‑51 This section examines John's testimony of Jesus to the third group, i.e. some of John's disciples on the third day (see vv. 19-28; 29-34 for the first and second groups). In keeping with his modesty (v. 27), John focuses the attention of his own disciples on Jesus (v. 37).
1:37 follow Jesus Although, in apostolic style, the verb “to go” usually means “to follow as a disciple” (v. 43; 8:12; 12:26; 21:19, 20, 22), it can also have an undefined meaning (11:31). Here, "following" does not necessarily mean that they became regular disciples at that time. Perhaps they followed Jesus to get to know Him better because of John's testimony. Here, the disciples of John the Baptist were first influenced by Jesus (eg Andrew; 1:40). Ultimately, when Jesus called them to permanent ministry after these events, they dedicated their lives to Him as true disciples (Matthew 4: 18-22; 9: 9; Mark 1: 16-20). From this point in the narrative, John the Baptist gradually disappears from the scene, and all attention is focused on the ministry of Christ.
1:39 of the tenth hour The Jews divided the daylight hours into 12 o'clock (starting at dawn, from about 6 o'clock). So, it may have been about 4 pm. Most likely, John mentions the exact time to emphasize that he was the other disciple of John the Baptist who came to Christ with Andrew (v. 40). He was an eyewitness to the events that took place over the next three days, and the first meeting with Jesus was so significant in his life that John even remembered the exact time of this meeting with the Lord.
1:41 Messiah The word "Messiah" is a transliteration of the Hebrew or Aramaic verbal adjective "Anointed." It comes from a verb meaning to "anoint" someone and refers to an action that entails the initiation of that person into a particular role or activity. The expression first referred to the king of Israel ("the anointed of the Lord" - 1 Sam. 16: 6), the high priest ("the anointed priest" - Lev. 4: 3) and, in one place, to the patriarchs ("my anointed" - Psalm 104: 15). Ultimately, it reached its highest significance in predicting the "Coming" or "Messiah" as prophet, priest and king. The term "Christ" - a Greek word (verb adjective) derived from the verb meaning "anointing" - is used as a translation of the Hebrew term. The words "Messiah" or "Christ" are not personal names of Jesus, but His titles.
1:42 But Jesus, looking at him Jesus knows hearts perfectly (vv. 43-51) and not only looks into them (vv. 47, 48), but also transforms a person into what he wants him to be. you will be called Kifa Until that time, Peter was known as “Simon, son of Jonah” (the name “Jonah” in Aramaic means “John”; cf. 21: 15-17; Matt. 16:17). In Aramaic, the word "Kifa" means "stone", it is translated into Greek "Peter". Jesus gave Simon the name "Cephas" or "Peter" at the beginning of His ministry (cf. Matt. 16:18; Mark. 3:16). This statement not only predicts who Peter will be called, but also tells how Jesus will change his character and use Peter to found the church (cf. 21:18, 19; Matt. 16: 16-18; Acts 2:14 –4: 32).
1:43‑51 This section reflects the fourth day since the beginning of the testimony of John the Baptist (cf. vv. 19, 29, 35).
1:44 from Bethsaida, from the same city with Andrew and Peter Although Mark in 1:21, 29 calls Peter's hometown Capernaum, John says that it was from Bethsaida. The solution to the problem lies in the fact that Peter and Andrew most likely grew up in Bethsaida and later moved to Capernaum, just as Jesus constantly identified with His hometown of Nazareth, although He later lived in a different place (Matt. 2: 23; 4:13; Mark 1: 9; Luke 1:26).
1:45 The one that Moses in the law and the prophets wrote about This phrase summarizes the position of the entire gospel of John: Jesus is the fulfillment of the Old Testament Scripture (cf. v. 21; 5:39; Deut. 18: 15-19; Luke 24:44, 47; Acts 10:43; 18:28 ; 26:22, 23; Rom. 1: 2; 1 Cor. 15: 3; 1 Pet. 1:10, 11; Rev. 19:10). from Nazareth, can there be anything good? Nathanael was from Cana (21: 2), another Galilean city. While the Jews despised the Galileans, the Galileans themselves did not value the people of Nazareth. In light of what was said at 7:52, Nathanael's disdain was likely based on the fact that Nazareth was not an important settlement and did not matter from the point of view of prophecy (cf., however, Matt. 2:23). Later, some will scornfully call the Christian faith “the Nazarene heresy” (Acts 24: 5).
1:47 no guile Jesus meant that Nathanael's directness showed that he was an Israelite with no two-faced motives, inclined to personally verify claims made about Jesus. Expression reveals an honest seeking heart. The link here refers to Gen. 27:35, where Jacob, unlike the sincere Nathanael, was known for his cunning. Perhaps the point here is that the use of deception was not only a distinctive feature of Jacob, but also of his descendants. For Jesus, an honest and sincere Israelite was the exception rather than the rule (cf. 2: 23-25).
1:48 I saw you A laconic allusion to the supernatural knowledge of Jesus. Not only were Jesus' brief conclusions about Nathanael correct (v. 47), but He also revealed information that only Nathanael himself could have known. Perhaps Nathanael had an important or exceptional fellowship with God in that place, and Jesus' allusion to this was clearly recognizable. In any case, Jesus had knowledge of this event inaccessible to man.
1:49 Son of God ... King of Israel Jesus' manifestation of supernatural knowledge and the testimony of Philip dispelled all doubts of Nathanael, so John added Nathanael's testimony to this part. The use of the definite article in the expression “Son of God” in the original most likely indicates that the phrase must be understood in its full sense (cf. v. 34; 11:27). For Nathanael, there was One about whom it was impossible to speak with simple, human words.
1:51 true, true Wed 5:19, 24, 25. Very often this phrase has been used to emphasize the importance and truth of the statement that follows. the sky is open and the angels of God ascending and descending In the light of the context of Art. 47, this verse probably refers to Gen. 28:12, where Jacob saw in a dream a staircase descending from heaven. Jesus pointed out to Nathanael that just as Jacob experienced supernatural or heavenly revelation, so Nathanael and the other disciples will experience fellowship that confirms who Jesus is. Moreover, the expression "Son of Man" replaced the ladder from Jacob's dream, showing that Jesus is the means of man's access to God. To the Son of Man See the explanation for Matt. 8:20. Jesus loved this name most of all, since he mostly pronounced it Himself (more than 80 times). In the New Testament, this phrase only refers to Jesus and is found mainly in the Gospels (cf. Acts 7:56). In the fourth Gospel, this expression appears 13 times and is most often associated with the theme of crucifixion and suffering (3:14; 8:28), revelation (6:27, 53), as well as with the theme of eschatological power (5:27; 9:39 ). While this term can sometimes speak simply of a person or replace "I" (6:27; cf. 6:20), it acquires a special eschatological meaning when referring to Dan. 7:13, 14, where the "Son of Man", or Messiah, comes in glory to receive the kingdom from the "Ancient of days" (ie, from the Father).
John McArthur
Interpretation of the books of the New Testament of Jacob
Dedicated to Tom Pennington with gratitude for the guidance in the ministry in the Grace to the Nations Church and dedicated help in the correct understanding and proclamation of the Word of God.
Foreword
Continuing to preach the New Testament in an accessible form, I am filled with a sense of participation in a work pleasing to God. I continually strive to develop a relationship with the Lord in order to gain a deeper understanding of His Word so that I can interpret the meaning of a particular Bible verse to His people. In the words of Nehem. 8: 8, I try to "add interpretation" to the Word of God, so that the chosen people not only listened but also heard, and as a consequence, performed His law.
The people of God are obliged to understand God, for which they must know the “word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15), so that it may dwell in them abundantly (Col. 3:16). Therefore, at the forefront of my ministry, I put helping the people of God in the knowledge of His Word - an activity that is very useful for spiritual growth.
This collection of commentaries on the New Testament reflects my intention to clarify Scripture. Some of the commentaries are primarily for linguistic purposes, others are predominantly theological in nature, and still others are preachy. This work is a kind of interpretation, or explanation. By its structure, it is not a linguistic tool, although it touches on aspects of linguistics when the need arises for a more accurate interpretation. Theologically, it is not very rich, but it examines the main doctrines of each individual fragment and their relationship with Scripture as a whole. This manual should not be considered exclusively moralizing, although, as a rule, a separate chapter is devoted to any judgment in it with a clear plan and logical conclusions. Most biblical truths are illustrated and viewed in the context of other books of Scripture. Having decided on the context of this or that fragment, I tried to follow the author's intention and line of reasoning as closely as possible.
I pray that my readers will be imbued with an understanding of the words of the Holy Spirit addressed to them, which are set forth in this part of Scripture, so that His revelations will find their way to the minds and hearts of believers and thereby motivate them to obedience and devotional service for the glory of our Lord.
Introduction
In his opening remarks to the first edition of the New Testament in Germany (1522), Martin Luther made the following often quoted remark in relation to James:
...The amazing Gospel of the Holy Apostle John and his First Epistle, the Epistles of the Holy Apostle Paul, especially to the Romans, Galatians and Ephesians, as well as the First Epistle of the Holy Apostle Peter - these are the books that will reveal Christ to you and teach you everything that is necessary and useful for you to know, even if you never read any other books of Scripture. Therefore, the Epistle of Saint James is very small in comparison with them, since it lacks the gospel essence (Quoted in James H. Ropes, “The Epistle of Saint James,” International Commentary on the Bible, p. 106).
The great leader of the Reformation by no means denies the power of the Epistle of James (as evidenced by his phrase: "in comparison with them"). However, his rather dismissive remarks about James have been shared by many Scriptural scholars throughout church history. In fact, due to the brevity of the Epistle, the lack of deep doctrinal content in it, as well as the fact that it is addressed to Jewish Christians and its author was not one of the twelve apostles or Paul, the book of James was added to the New Testament canon by one of the the latter. But this diminution of the importance of Jacob's work is very superficial. Luther rarely referred to the Epistle of James, because it says little about the basic doctrines of the Christian faith, of which he was an apologist. (In fact, some of Luther's hostility towards James is due to the fact that Luther's opponents from among Catholics misinterpreted the second chapter of this letter to defend their postulate of "justification by works." a purely practical guide for Christians. However, this does not detract from its value, since a righteous life and a sound faith are inseparable from each other. Speaking about the great significance of the Epistle of James, D. Edmond Gibert writes:
...This epistle stresses the relationship between the Christian faith and the Christian way of life, severely criticizes empty creeds and sternly denounces the reader's attachment to the worldly. The emphasis on the ethical imperative of the gospel makes this epistle as relevant today as it was when it was written. The presence of this practical treatise in the canon of the New Testament clearly testifies to the moral sensitivity of the Christian church (The Epistle of James, p. 11).
The direct and sharp instructions for mastering wisdom contained in the Epistle of James put it on a par with such treasures of Old Testament wisdom like the Book of Proverbs. And the harsh denunciation of social injustice (see chapters 2, 5) prompts some to call Jacob "Amos of the New Testament." Jacob was greatly influenced by the Sermon on the Mount; as noted in the first chapter of this study, this Epistle can be seen as a practical commentary on the Lord's preaching. The degree of this influence is clearly visible when analyzing the references and references to the Sermon on the Mount found in the Epistle of James.
The Epistle of Jacob
Of all the people named James mentioned in the New Testament, only two had sufficient fame and, therefore, could be the authors of this authoritative Epistle: James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, and James, who was Jesus' half brother. But the early martyrdom of Jacob Zebedeev (Acts 12: 2) excludes him from the list of applicants for authorship, leaving the only possible candidate - the half brother of Jesus. James, along with the rest of Jesus' brothers, initially rejected Him (see John 7: 5), but later believed in Jesus as the Savior of Israel. His zeal and piety were so noticeable that he soon became the recognized head of the Jerusalem church (see Acts 12:17; Gal. 2: 9) and remained so until his death in 62. (For more details on Jacob's life, see the first chapter of this book.)
Another confirmation of Jacob's authorship we find in the verbal parallels between the book of Jacob, the speech of Jacob and the letter of Jacob in Acts. 15. Greek verb chairein(to rejoice) in the imperative mood in the New Testament is found only in James. 1: 1 and Acts. 15:23 (except for Acts 23:26, where it is used by a Roman named Claudius Lysias). Other parallels include “beloved” (James 1: 16,19; 2: 5; Acts 15:25), “your souls” (James 1:21; Acts 15:24), “to look upon” (James. 1:27; Acts 15:14) and “convert” meaning “to turn to God” (James 5: 19-20; Acts 15:19).
The distinctly Jewish character of the letter is consistent with Jacob's description of Acts. 15; 21. The Epistle of James contains four direct passages from the Old Testament and over forty references to the Old Testament. In addition, Jacob uses clear Old Testament terminology, in the very first verse he mentions the twelve tribes in the scattering. James calls the gospel “the law of freedom” (2:12). The place where his readers gather is what he calls the "assembly", which in Greek sounds like "synagogue" (2: 2). In 4: 4, he uses the common Old Testament image of an adulterer to describe spiritual defilement. The violation of oaths by the Jews who lived with him at the same time, he denounces in 5:12. A prominent Old Testament figure, Elijah, is revealed as an example to follow in prayer (5: 17-18). Such “loud” Old Testament names like Abraham (2:21), Rahab (2:25) and Job (5:11) are also mentioned in his Epistle. In addition, Jacob is the only New Testament author to use the Old Testament term for God, "The Lord of hosts." (Paul uses this term only in the context of a quote from Isaiah in Rom. 9:29.)
Despite the particularly inspired description of Jacob in 1: 1 and strong evidence that it was Jacob, the Lord's blood brother, who wrote this epistle, pseudo-theologians reject its authorship. In support of their point of view, they cite quotations that are ambiguous. Usually their statements do not deserve attention, although they create a background for proving the authenticity of the authorship of this Message.
I am not afraid to state in the affirmative that over the course of 9 years the Study Bible with commentaries by John MacArthur has gained considerable popularity and almost general recognition among the masses of Slavic society (and not only). Despite the fact that the Russian-speaking people were already familiar with various study Bibles, such as: the Geneva Bible, the Scofield Bible, the Thompson Bible and others, the Bible with MacArthur's comments took a leading position between them. This is not surprising, since the work itself is unique due to the original review of each book of the Bible (more on that below), contains more than 25,000 different notes and explanations to the text, filled with many maps, diagrams and tables. The Bible is being translated into many languages of the world and has recently been translated into Arabic, which is a huge blessing for many Christians in Muslim countries.
A little about the author. John McArthur is a pastor of the churchGrace has been in Los Angeles, California for 45 years. Belongs to the wing of conservative Christians. Those who know him personally can testify of his love for God, devotion to the Scriptures, and expository preaching. The author speaks the original languages of the Bible and researched the Holy Scriptures word by word and verse by verse. At the same time, each time he turned to 25-30 comments in order to verify the expounded text. John McArthur is the author of over 100 books, including detailed commentaries on each book of the New Testament. You can talk a lot about this man of God, but each of us understands that the works that he wrote would never have appeared without God's blessing (favor) and the author's loyalty to God. Praise God that He uses the simplest people to achieve His goal.
Opening the study Bible, the author makes a brief analysis and history of how the Bible came to be. The truth about the inspiration and infallibility of the nature of the Word of God is affirmatively and authoritatively proclaimed. John McArthur gives advice on how to study Scripture properly and goes through a step-by-step study process.
Study Bible structure
1. The text of the Bible is divided into paragraphs and verses, which allows the reader to quickly group the text by content.
2. There are also cross-reference columns highlighting certain words and phrases for better understanding.
3. If a word is not understood in the Bible, then there is an alternative, literal, explanatory, equivalent translation of the word.
4. If the word is Old Slavic (for example: daughter), then it is translated into an understandable language (daughter = daughter)
5. Each Bible verse is explained in detail.
6. A detailed reasoned and authoritative review of the books of the Old and New Testaments:
In my opinion, John McArthur's (and his team) review of the books of Scripture is systematic, written in accessible language, and is an objective and authoritative work in both theology and popularized reading for church members.
Each book review begins with a reviewBible book titles.
MacArthur gives an overview of the name of the author of the book (for example, what does the name "Matthew" mean); if the title of the epistle refers to the city (for example, the epistle to the Romans), then brief information is given about the city, to the church of which the epistle was written; if the message is written to a person (for example, Timothy, Titus), then information is given about this person, where he lived, how he turned to God, what was his ministry, what was the connection between the author of the message and the recipient.
The next point of review is information aboutthe author and the time of writing the book.
Throughout the review, the author proclaims a conservative (correct) point of view regarding the authorship of the book. If the author of the message is not listed, then the names of the alleged authors are given. Naturally, the epistles and books are difficult to date, and an approximate date is given based on biblical sources, historical and archaeological information, as well as the works of early Christian authors of the church, such as Origen, Eusebius of Cessaria and others.
Next we can seehistorical background and backgrounds of writing a book.
This section is unique in that it gives a characterization of the society during which the books of the Bible were written; what purpose was pursued by the author when he wrote the book; in what language the book or message; the reason for writing the book is indicated. We can read about the religious environment of that time, in particular, about heresy, in condemnation and warning against which the letter or the book of the Bible was written.
Also the author considershistorical and theological themes
.
The main topics discussed in the book are considered; the nature of the message is considered: polemical or pastoral; genealogy of the book (on the example of the book of Ruth). Also, through the review of the four Gospels, we can see that Matthew presents Jesus as the King of the Jews, interest in the Old Testament promises of the Kingdom runs through all of his Gospel (p. 1373); Mark presents Jesus as the suffering servant of the Lord (p. 1438); Jesus Christ as a great Physician and minister to people (p. 1491); John presents Jesus as the Christ and Savior of all mankind.
The last point in the review -interpretation problems
This point is especially unique, since often in various reviews of the books of the Bible we can see the already approved point of the author who is writing the introduction. In this case, MacArthur invites us to consider various points of view, and only then, in the comments, does he give his position regarding his approved opinion. The author points to those passages of Holy Scripture, the interpretation of which causes different opinions. For example, what is the sin of death? (p. 1714); who are those who are baptized for the dead and is such a practice permissible in our time (p. 1780); can women hold leadership positions in the church? (p. 1910). All difficult questions are then dealt with in the comments below.
7. There is a detailed outline for each book of the Bible.
8. Throughout the Bible, black and white maps, diagrams, tables, plans of books are given, which help to better understand and assimilate the material and revive in your memory the events that took place in the times of the Old and New Testaments.
I am sure that those who want to better understand each book of the Bible have no better source (concerning study Bibles) in Russian.
I advise everyone to purchase a Bible with commentary by John McArthur
Created: 28.12.2017, 2944 6
"Do not say: we have found wisdom: God will refute him, not man" (Job 32:13)
The history of Christianity knows many wonderful theologians who brought the Word of God to people, pointing out the way of salvation to millions of people. Modern Christianity has a number of famous names of theologians who in one way or another influenced the preaching of the Gospel around the world. One such contemporary theologian who has some influence on Christians around the world is John Fullerton MacArthur, Jr. In short, we can say about him that he is an American preacher, pastor of the non-denominational church "Grace Community Church" in Sun Valley, California. MacArthur is the author of over 150 Christian books, of which the most published study is the Study Bible, with over a million copies sold. Interestingly, some sources of information call John MacArthur a Baptist shepherd and preacher, although in reality he is the pastor of a church that does not identify himself with any of the denominations. Apparently the similarities with the Baptists in the form and process of ministry in the Grace Community Church led to such conclusions. However, in the process of reviewing the theology of John MacArthur, not only Baptist doctrines, but also Calvinist doctrines, and even doctrines inherent in Seventh-day Adventists, are immediately striking. Also, John MacArthur's books can be seen in libraries of different denominations, and not only among Baptists. Although it should be mentioned that MacArthur is an opponent of the charismatic movement, especially their teachings about modern prophets.
It is noteworthy that the works of John MacArthur have an impact in churches not only in the United States, but also in the countries of the former USSR, where his Study Bible, containing short commentaries and explanations to the Bible texts, stands apart. The Study Bible contains an excerpt from MacArthur's multivolume edition of the Bible books. For the sake of fairness, it must be said that the MacArthur Study Bible contains a lot of good information, especially in terms of describing the historical background of Biblical events. But at the same time, dogma is permeated with statements that contradict not only the Biblical context, but even themselves. Here we look at some of John MacArthur's controversial dogmatic statements found in the pages of the Study Bible, and begin our analysis with simpler statements.
Some Biblical texts are missing from the main manuscripts... The MacArthur Study Bible is a modern English translation of the Bible with concise commentary by John MacArthur. As you know, modern translations of the Bible, in part of the New Testament, are a translation of the Greek text from the critical edition of Nestlé-Aland. This edition is missing a number of Bible texts that are found in all Bibles of the Reformation. Here we will not consider in detail the features of critical texts, but you can read about them in our articles: "Correct Translation of the Bible", "Gnosticism in Critical Texts of the New Testament", "False Landmark in the Book of Bruce Metzger -" Textual Science of the New Testament ", and" Bible. The struggle of the Catholic Church against the Reformation by the hands of the Protestants and reformers themselves. " Interestingly, the Russian version of the MacArthur Study Bible uses the Synodal translation, where the missing texts are, and the reader sees the following inscription in the comments to these verses: "This verse is absent in the most common manuscripts." For example, this can be found in the commentary on Matthew 17:21, Matthew 23:14, Acts 8:37, and so on. In addition, in modern translations there are a number of modified verses that have a completely different meaning than in the Bibles of the Reformation, for example, Matthew 23:14 in the Synodal translation looks like this: "But he said to him: why do you call Me good? No one is good but God alone. If you want to enter into eternal life, keep the commandments."... However, in the modern translations underlying the MacArthur Study Bible, the text looks different: "And He said to him," Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments "(New American Standard Bible)... Here the underlined text translated into Russian sounds like “why do you ask Me about good?”, And the focus of attention is shifted from the person of Jesus Christ to “good” or “common good”, which is the basic question of Greek philosophy. Interestingly, commenting on such a text, MacArthur writes: “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but God alone. " Jesus did not deny His nature as God at all, He only told the young man that everyone except God is sinners. ”(MacArthur Study Bible)... And here we see the embarrassment when MacArthur refuses to see the word about good in the text of the modern translation, and comments on the text contained in the King James translation about the person of Jesus Christ. This leaves the reader perplexed, why is MacArthur citing words that are not recorded in the modern translation that the reader is currently seeing? The situation is the same with Matthew 17:21, Matthew 23:14, and Acts 8:37. This is MacArthur's gross inconsistency and careless attitude towards the Bible texts, which raises many questions from the reader. As for the Russian-language version of MacArthur's Study Bible, the whole problem here is that the Synodal translation was made the basic translation for MacArthur's comments, which contradicts the modern translation that MacArthur read and commented on.
Septaugint... Continuing the theme of the Bible texts, it must be said that John MacArthur believes that the Apostles read and quoted the Septuagint, the Greek text of the Old Testament. He believes the Septuagint texts date back to the pre-Christian period and were used by Greek-speaking Jews. This is reflected in MacArthur's comments, for example, we read in the Bible: "Behold, the Virgin in her womb will receive and bear a Son, and they will call His name Immanuel, which means: God with us" (Matthew 1:23)... Commenting on this text, MacArthur says: "Virgo" - Theologians sometimes debate whether the Hebrew term in Isa. 7:14 "virgin" or "girl". Matthew is citing here from the Septuagint, which uses an unambiguous interpretation of the Greek term "virgin" (MacArthur Study Bible)... Let's think about why Matthew, who was a Jew living in Israel, where they spoke mainly Hebrew and Aramaic, and also read Scripture in Hebrew, needed Matthew, so that he suddenly began to quote a text from the Greek Septuagint? Unfortunately, MacArthur does not provide an answer to this question. Moreover, he goes even further in his fantasies in his commentary on Matthew 24: 3, which says: "When He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him in private and asked: tell us, when will it be? And what is the sign of Your coming and the end of the age?" (Matthew 24: 3)... Here MacArthur says: “When they asked about His coming (Greek parousia, literally“ presence ”), they had no idea that the Second Coming would be in the distant future. They spoke of His triumphant coming as Messiah as an event that (they had no doubt) would happen very soon. Even if they were aware of His approaching death, about which He clearly and repeatedly prophesied (see explanation for 20:19), they did not assume that there would be His Ascension and the long period of the church's existence. Nevertheless, He used the word parousia in His sermon, but used it in a special sense, as a reference to His Second Coming "(MacArthur Study Bible)... In this commentary, MacArthur comes to the conclusion that Jesus Christ, speaking with his disciples in Hebrew, suddenly uses the Greek word "parousia", ignoring that the Gospel of Matthew was written after Christ's ascension and was a translation of His words into Greek, and Jesus himself did not speak Greek with students. That is, not only the Apostles quoted the Greek text of the Old Testament, but Christ himself began to use Greek words. Unfortunately, such nonsense has spread in millions of copies. In fact, the text that today is called the Septuagint did not exist at the time of the Apostles, and was born already in the Christian period, which can be read about in our article "The Septuagint - what is it?" ...
There is an opinion that a situation is quite possible when Jews in the 1st century spoke the state languages of the Roman Empire, and since the time of the Babylonian captivity, Jews stopped speaking their native language. As a consequence, their native language was Aramaic. The answer to this opinion can be found in the text of the New Testament itself, which describes cases when the Hebrew language was in use among the Jews. So, let's look at the text that says about the crucifixion of Jesus Christ: "This inscription was read by many of the Jews, because the place where Jesus was crucified was not far from the city, and it was written in Jewish, in Greek, in Roman "(John 19:20)... Here we see that on the plate of “guilt” of Jesus Christ there was an inscription in three languages, where one of the languages was Hebrew. If the Jews lost the Hebrew language and did not speak it, then why write an inscription in this language? Another important fact of the use of the Hebrew language was the communication of the Jews themselves, which can be seen below:
- "When he allowed, Paul, standing on the stairs, gave a sign with his hand to the people; and when there was a deep silence, he began to speak in Hebrew so "(Acts 21:40);
- "Hearing that he spoke to them in Hebrew, they have calmed down even more. He said "(Acts 22: 2);
- "We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice speaking to me in Hebrew: Saul, Saul! why are you persecuting Me? It's hard for you to go against the prick "(Acts 26:14).
In these texts we see that the Apostle Paul addressed the Jewish people in the Hebrew language, and they listened to him and understood him. Likewise, Jesus Christ, when he first appeared to Paul, also spoke to him in Hebrew. These cases indicate that during the life of the Apostles, the Hebrew language was widespread among the Jews, and they spoke it quite well. This does not in any way negate the fact that the Aramaic language was also in use among the Jews, as well as the fact that they might know Greek. However, we do not find cases in the Bible when the Apostles spoke to Jews in Greek. This situation perplexes the words of MacArthur that Jesus Christ spoke to the Apostles in Greek, and specifically used certain Greek words.
In addition, the Jewish Scriptures were preserved in the Hebrew language, as evidenced by the archaeological excavations of the Dead Sea Scrolls, where a large number of manuscripts from the period of the 1st-2nd centuries were found. Here, the largest number of Scriptures was found in the Hebrew language, which negates the idea that the Jews of the 1st century did not use the Scriptures in Hebrew.
All of the above shows that MacArthur, trying to show that Christ spoke in Greek with the Apostles, made a failed attempt to make people believe that the Jews of the 1st century used the Greek Septuagint as Holy Scripture.
Basis of Judaism... Sometimes in the Bible commentaries of John MacArthur, you can find rather strange words. One such point is the commentary on the following text: "So we, as long as we were in childhood, were enslaved to the material principles of the world" (Epistle to Galatians 4: 3)... Explaining the words of the Apostle Paul about the Law, MacArthur says the following: "The word" beginning "comes from the Greek. a term meaning "row" or "step". They were used to designate fundamental things, for example, the letters of the alphabet. In the light of its application in Art. 9, this word is best seen here as a reference to the basic elements and rituals of human religion (see the explanation for Col. 2: 8). Paul describes the Jewish and pagan religions as simply human, never reaching God's level. Both Jewish and pagan religions are based on a system of affairs invented by man. They are full of the rites and ceremonies required to be performed in order to achieve God's favor. All these external elements carry immaturity, as is the case with children who are subordinate to their caregivers. ”- MacArthur Study Bible)... From this we see that MacArthur claims that the Jewish religion, that is, Judaism, contains at its core human rituals. After all, we know that Judaism is based on the Law given by God through Moses, and the rituals that are in Judaism were given by God. But MacArthur sees that the rituals in Judaism are human, which does not fit and contradict the context of the Bible. Perhaps MacArthur means by Judaism Pharisaism, which has survived to this day and occupies a dominant position in Jewish society. If you look at Pharisaism from this point of view, then indeed there is a huge number of human rituals in it that are not written in the Law, but it is not the only representative of Judaism. For example, there are other currents in modern Judaism such as Hasidism, Litvaki, Karaites, and so on. Especially interesting are the Karaites, who do not recognize any teachings and books, except for the Tanakh - the books of the Old Testament. Be that as it may, one cannot say that Judaism is based on human commandments, because in reality it is based on the Torah - the Pentateuch of Moses, which represents the words of God, not man, including in terms of rituals.
Demons in the dungeon... On the question of Judaism, John MacArthur's strange statements did not end, and one can see a rather exotic commentary on the following Biblical text: "because Christ also, in order to bring us to God, once suffered for our sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, being put to death according to the flesh, but revived by the spirit by which He came down and preached to the spirits that were in prison, once disobedient to God's longsuffering that awaited them, in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved from the water "(1 Peter 3: 18-20)... MacArthur says the following about this text: "In the dungeon to the spirits" Refers to the fallen angels (demons) who are forever bound in chains because of their great anger. Demons who are not yet in the underworld resist such a judgment (cf. Luke 8:31). As a result, they will all be cast into the lake of fire forever (Matt. 25:41; Rev. 20:10). preached Between the death of Christ and His resurrection, His Spirit descended to the demons who were in the underworld, and preached there that, despite His death, He won the victory over them (see notes to Col. 2: 14,15). disobedient ... in the days of Noah, Peter further explains that the underworld is inhabited by demons who have been there since the time of Noah and who got there because their disobedience overwhelmed God's longsuffering. In the days of Noah, demons revolted on earth, filled the world with their wickedness, meanness, deeds contrary to God, including sexual sins, so that even 120 years of Noah's preaching, while the ark was being built, could not convince anyone to believe God, except 8 people from family of Noah "(MacArthur Study Bible)... That is, he claims that Christ descended to demons in prison in order to preach to them His victory over them, and not to the spirits of people who perished during the flood. This view is also shared by Seventh-day Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses, where the latter put it this way: “According to the apostle Peter, these spirits were“ once disobedient, when in the days of Noah God waited patiently ”(1 Pet. 3:20). Surely Peter was referring to the spirit creatures who chose to join Satan's rebellion. Jude mentions the angels who “did not retain their original position, but left their proper dwelling place,” and says that God “keeps [them] in eternal fetters under the cover of gloomy darkness for the judgment of the great day” (Jude 6) ... Probably after what It was during that time after his resurrection that Jesus announced to the evil spirits that they would receive an absolutely deserved punishment. Such preaching did not give them any hope. It was a sermon of condemnation (Jonah 1: 1, 2). Since Jesus showed faith and devotion to death and then was resurrected (this proved that the Devil had no power over him), Jesus had reason to pronounce such a conviction ”(The Watchtower, 06/15/2013, pp. 22-23)... But such an interpretation of the text leads to a number of questions, namely: if on earth demons forced people to sin in the time of Noah, then why some of them are in prison, and some are free today, what is the difference between them? This text says "to the longsuffering of God," which means that God waited and endured for a long time. What was God waiting for? Repentance? Since MacArthur believes in the immortality of the soul, another question arises: where are the people who were at the time of Noah, and why did he decide that it was demons, and not people of the time of the flood? In general, this interpretation of the text leads to even more questions than the answers received.
About the oath... Quite interestingly, MacArthur imagines the pronouncement of oaths, in the light of the New Testament, for example, let's look at the words of Jesus Christ: "But I say to you: do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is the throne of God; nor by the earth, because it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, because it is the city of the great King; neither swear by your head, because you can neither make one hair white or black. But let your word be: yes, yes; no, no; and what is beyond this is from the evil one "(Matthew 5: 34-37)... Reading this text, we can see the attitude of Jesus Christ to the oath, but MacArthur sees these words of Christ in his own way, where he says the following: “Do not swear at all.” Compare James 5:12. This passage should not be taken as condemnation of an oath in all circumstances. God Himself sealed His promise with an oath (Heb. 6: 13-18; cf. Acts 2:30. Christ Himself spoke under oath. (26:63, 64) Under certain circumstances, the law permits oaths (eg Numbers 5:19, 21; 30: 2, 3) "(MacArthur Study Bible)... In this short text, John MacArthur has made some serious statements that need to be explored in more detail.
First, he claims that Christ spoke under oath, referring to the text of Matthew 26: 63-64, in which we read the following words: "Jesus was silent. And the high priest said to him: I conjure you by the living God, tell us, are you the Christ, the Son of God? Jesus says to him: you said; even I say to you: from now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven" ( Matthew 26: 63-64)... MacArthur understands this text as follows: “I conjure.” See note at 5:34. Caiaphas tried to break the silence of Jesus (v. 62). The oath was to legally compel Him to answer. Jesus' answer (v. 64) suggests that He took the oath. " MacArthur)... That is, he claims that the words "conjure you" means bringing someone to an oath, and the fact that Christ did not remain silent meant that He took the oath. The word "conjure", according to the Dictionaries of Ushakov and Ozhegov, does not mean an oath, but a request or prayer in the name of something holy. That is, when the high priest said these words, he expressed a prayer in the name of God that Christ would say whether He is the Son of God. Such an understanding of the spell is also present in other texts of the New Testament, for example, in Mark 5:27 it is said about an evil spirit who said to Jesus Christ: “I conjure you by God, do not torment me!”, Did the evil spirit lead to the oath of Christ? It is impossible to bring someone to an oath or an oath without the consent of the other party and uttering the text of the oath. But Christ did not take the oath, and the fact that He answered the high priest did not at all mean that he took the oath, this is simply not in the text of the Bible.
Second, MacArthur argues that Matthew 5:34 does not speak of giving up oaths, and suggests comparing it with James 5:12, which says: "First of all, my brethren, do not swear by heaven or earth, and no other oath, but let it be with you: "yes, yes" and "no, no", so that you do not fall under condemnation "(Epistle of the Apostle James 5:12)... However, in this text the words "no other oath" are said, which includes any oath. In fact, this text does not leave any possible options for an oath, but completely prohibits any form of oath.
Based on the words of MacArthur, it is clear that he proposes not to notice in the New Testament the complete exclusion of the oath from the life of a Christian, and does not want to understand the words of Christ and the Apostles directly, as they are written.
Law... A characteristic feature of MacArthur, as a shepherd of the non-denominational church, is the acceptance of certain dogmas from various denominations. One of these teachings is a look at the Law that was given to Moses and its place in the Christian life, about which John MacArthur says the following: "Between Jew and Gentile, the greatest barrier rose in the form of a ceremonial law - the Law of the Commandments. Christ abolished the festivities, sacrifices, gatherings, laws, purifications and sanctification and all the commandments that distinguished Israel that made its unique characteristics. But God did not abolish His moral law, as the word of doctrine indicates. His moral law reflects His holy nature and is therefore never subject to change (cf. Matt. 5: 17-19). This law received its expression in the ten commandments given to the Jews, and is written in all human hearts "(John MacArthur, Interpretation of the Books of the New Testament, Epistle to the Ephesians, Chapter 7 -" Unity of the Body - Church ") ... These words clearly show the teaching of Seventh-day Adventists about dividing the law into ceremonial and moral, and that Christ abolished the ceremonial law and left the moral one. It is this idea that MacArthur echoes exactly, which was reflected in the interpretation of many other Bible texts, for example, in the following Bible text:"but to the false brothers who crept in, secretly coming to spy on our freedom, which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to enslave us" (Epistle to Galatians 2: 4) ... Commenting on this text, MacArthur sees the following in it: « freedom "- Christians are free from the law as a means of salvation, from its external rites and regulations as a way of life and from the curse for disobeying the law - the curse that Christ bore for all believers (3:13)" (MacArthur Study Bible) ... Here we see the assertion that Christians are not saved by law, where MacArthur implies external rites and lifestyle regulations. But here the question arises, what is meant by lifestyle regulations? If this means the moral norms of the Law, then MacArthur contradicts himself, because in the interpretation considered earlier, he claims that the moral Law has remained. But even this is not important here, but the fact that in the Bible there is no division of the Law into ceremonial and moral, and this division was invented by people. There are commandments in the law that are difficult to attribute to ceremonial or moral law, for example, a decree on the refusal to use blood for food. Which part of the Law does this apply to? If to the moral, then on what basis can one determine that this is a moral law, because this commandment is not in the Ten Commandments? If to the ceremonial, then it turns out that Christ freed from all ceremonial commandments, but the Apostles, according to the book of Acts 15:29, forbade the use of blood for food, then they renewed the commandment, which Christ abolished? There are many such commandments, and the supporters of the division of the Law create difficulties for themselves. As stated, this idea was taken from Adventists, and supported by MacArthur. Another theologian, William MacDonald, spoke well of this view, the division of the Law, where he says:“Sabbath prophets usually begin by preaching salvation by faith in Jesus Christ. They use their favorite gospel hymns to lure the ignorant and seem to place great emphasis on Scripture. But they soon subordinate their followers to the Law of Moses, especially emphasizing the commandment of the Sabbath (Saturday is the seventh day). How dare they do this in light of Paul's clear teaching that the Christian is dead to the law? How can they get around what was clearly stated in Galatians? The answer is that they distinguish between moral law and ceremonial law. The moral law is the Ten Commandments. The ceremonial law is other ordinances given by God, such as rules regarding unclean food, leprosy, offerings to God, etc. The moral law, they say, has never been abolished. It is an expression of the eternal truth of God. Engaging in idolatry, committing murder or adultery will always be against the law of God. However, Christ put an end to the ceremonial law. Therefore, they conclude, when Paul teaches that the Christian is dead to the law, he is talking about the ceremonial law, not the Ten Commandments ... Paul does not distinguish between moral and ceremonial laws. Rather, he insists that the law is one and that cursed are those who try to achieve righteousness through it, but at the same time cannot fulfill it completely "(William MacDonald, Commentary on Galatians, chapter 6) .
The division of the Law into moral and ceremonial leads John MacArthur to misinterpret some other important passages in the Bible, for example, we read the text of the Apostle Paul about the New Testament: "By saying" new, "he showed the decrepitude of the first; but the decaying and aging is close to destruction" (Hebrews 8:13)... Following the Adventist perspective, MacArthur arrives at the following interpretation: "Close to destruction." Soon after the writing of the Book of Hebrews, the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed and the worship of the Levites ended. ”(MacArthur Study Bible)... With these words MacArthur shows that the end of the Levite ministry marked the destruction of the first covenant, but the Levite ministry was not the whole essence of the covenant and the Law, but only a part. By this, MacArthur is trying to imagine that by the old covenant the Apostle Paul means the ceremonial law. In fact, Paul is talking about the covenant as a whole, and there is no division in Paul's words. This division is a falsification of facts, which is not reflected in the text in any way.
The commandments of Jesus Christ... John MacArthur adopted Adventist dogma not only regarding the division of the Law into ceremonial and moral, but also a view of the commandments of Jesus Christ. In order to understand what this position is, let's look at the words of Jesus Christ: "You have heard what the ancients said: do not kill, whoever kills is subject to judgment. But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother in vain is subject to judgment; whoever says to his brother:" cancer "is subject to the Sanhedrin; and who will say: "foolish", subject to hell of fire "(Matthew 5: 21-22)... MacArthur's commentary on this text reveals the essence of his views on this issue, where he says the following: "Christ did not change the words of the law in any of these Scriptures. He rather corrected what they 'heard', that is, the interpretation of the law by the rabbis" (MacArthur Study Bible)... Here MacArthur claims that Christ corrected the interpretation of the rabbis, and did not change anything. But in this case, the question arises: where does it say in the Old Testament "who will say:" foolish "is subject to fiery hell"? This shows that MacArthur, like Adventists, rejects the existence of the commandments of Jesus Christ, and the fact that Christ brought a new teaching, which came to replace the commandments of the Law. In light of this attitude, MacArthur's view of the following words of Christ is very interesting: "You have heard what the ancients said: do not commit adultery. But I tell you that everyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart" (Matthew 5: 27-28)... This text contains words that have never been in the Law, namely the words that he who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her. Therefore, it cannot be said that this is an interpretation of the Law, especially when these words are preceded by the phrase “and I speak,” where Jesus Christ clearly shows that these are His words, and not from the Law. Therefore, MacArthur had problems with such words of Christ, and for this reason he does not have any comments on such texts, including no comments on the following text: "for you know what commandments we have given you from the Lord Jesus" (1 Thessalonians 4: 2)... This is an extremely inconvenient text, which directly indicates the existence of the commandments of Jesus Christ, but to which MacArthur, like the Adventists, turned a blind eye.
This attitude towards the commandments of Christ, or rather the unwillingness to acknowledge their existence, leads MacArthur to contradict himself. To see this contradiction, read the text: "His disciples say to him: if such is a man's duty to a wife, then it is better not to marry" (Matthew 19:10)... Looking at the interpretation of this text by John MacArthur, one gets the impression that he has forgotten a little about his attitude to the commandments of Christ, and says the following: “The disciples correctly understood the nature of the obligations that marriage imposes, and that Jesus set a very high standard by allowing divorce only as a last resort.” - MacArthur Study Bible... Here MacArthur, unexpectedly for himself, says that Jesus set the standard, that is, He gave some decrees from Himself. Moreover, MacArthur says that Jesus even allowed divorce in a special case, that is, again Christ gave permission from Himself. Such a statement in no way fits the words that Christ did not change anything, but only interpreted. And here is a question for MacArthur and his supporters: did Jesus Christ change something, or did he just explain the Law? This is an obvious contradiction, where, on the one hand, Christ did not change anything in the matter of keeping the Law, and on the other hand, He made His regulations.
Election and predestination... The central tenet of John MacArthur is the teaching of the Calvinists that God predestined people for salvation. For such statements, the main text of the Bible is usually the following: "For whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren" (Romans 8:29)... MacArthur says the following about his understanding of predestination: “Foreknew” - Not just an indication of God's omniscience - that in the distant eternity He knew who would come to Christ. Rather, it speaks of the choice of those whom His love will touch and with whom He will establish kinship, that is, of His election (cf. Acts 2:23, where the unbreakable rule of Greek grammar indicates the relationship between "predestination" and “foreknowledge,” see notes on 1 Pet. 1, 2 and cf. 1:20 - this word must be translated in the same way in both verses). See the explanation of election at 9: 10-24. “Predetermined” - Literally “singled out, appointed or determined in advance”. Whom God chooses, He determines to the final likeness to His Son (see the explanations to Eph. 1: 4, 5, 11) "(MacArthur Study Bible)... In this explanation, we see that MacArthur understands foreknowledge and predestination as the “appointment in advance” of those who will be saved. This means that God has appointed in advance who will be saved and who will not, and nothing can change this situation. This understanding leads him to a contradictory understanding of other Bible texts, where he contradicts not only the context of the Bible, but also himself. An example of this can be seen in the interpretation of the following Biblical text: "All things have been delivered to Me by My Father, and no one knows the Son, except the Father; and no one knows the Father, except the Son, and to whom the Son wants to reveal. Come to Me, all who labor and are burdened, and I will give you rest" (Matthew 11:27 -28)... MacArthur explains this text as follows: “This scripture reflects the first commandment of Beatitude (5: 3). Note that this open invitation, addressed to all who hears, is formulated in such a way that only those who are aware of their spiritual poverty and who are disappointed in their attempts to be saved by the law will respond to this invitation. The stubbornness of people is such that without a spiritual awakening sent by God, all sinners refuse to realize the full depth of their spiritual poverty. Therefore, as Jesus says in v. 27, our salvation is the result of God's influence. The truth of God's election in v. 27 is not inconsistent with the free offer of salvation to all in v. 28-30 "(MacArthur Study Bible)... In this interpretation, one can see a clear contradiction to oneself, where, on the one hand, it is said that God openly invites all people to him, but at the same time, for some of these people he does not give spiritual awakening, and therefore they refuse to realize their spiritual poverty. In other words, the responsibility to reject God's grace lies not with man, but with God. The Chosen One is the one originally appointed prior to its creation, yet MacArthur says this does not contradict the free offer of salvation. But the problem is that “purpose” and “freedom” are concepts that are not compatible from the outset. That is, he says that on the one hand, God appoints the saved in advance, and on the other hand, there is the freedom to choose whether to accept salvation or not, which is completely incompatible. This is an attempt to combine two opposing concepts, which also leads to a contradiction in the context of the Bible.
An attempt to combine incompatible concepts leads MacArthur to a very unusual understanding of other Bible texts, such as those related to the punishment of sinners. To see an example of this understanding, read the following Bible text: "Even so, it is not the will of your Father in heaven that one of these little ones should perish" (Matthew 18:14)... Now let's see what MacArthur has to say about this text: "perished - this word can (and in this context it is) means spiritual death rather than eternal destruction. But this does not imply that God's children will die at all (cf. John 10:28)" (MacArthur Study Bible)... Here MacArthur says that the word “perished” means a spiritually dead person, although the context of this verse speaks of salvation. We read a few verses above: "For the Son of Man came to seek and save that which was lost" (Matthew 18:11)... This text says that Christ came to save people who are lost, that is, in a position where they cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Therefore, destruction in verse 14 does not mean spiritual death, but eternal destruction, because one who is already spiritually dead cannot spiritually die.
Some of MacArthur's statements raise a lot of questions, especially against the background of his understanding of predestination, for example, we read two texts:
1). "and then many will be offended, and betray one another, and hate one another" (Matthew 24:10). In the MacArthur study Bible, you can find the following interpretation: “many will be tempted Literally,“ they will be forced to stumble, ”“ misled. ”In other words, the imaginary believers will fall away and even turn against each other, shocking with their spiritual betrayal. testify that they were never true believers at all. "- MacArthur Study Bible)... Here we see the statement that if a person was a member of the church, but fell away, then he never was a believer, that is, he excludes that a true believer can fall away from the church. In other words, one can say that a person who fell away from the church was never saved.
2). "But if he does not listen to them, tell the church; but if he does not listen to the church, then let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector" (Matthew 18:17). MacArthur sees the meaning of this text as follows: “The point is not to simply punish the sinner or completely avoid him, but to remove him from the church community as having a harmful influence, and from that time on treating him not as a brother, but as object of evangelism "(MacArthur Study Bible)... Here we see that he believes that a person remote from church society is an object of evangelization, that is, as if an unbeliever, who is again called to repentance. This moment just raises a number of questions: why should someone evangelize, if God has already predetermined who will be saved? If the one who fell away from the church was never a believer and saved, then he was not determined for salvation, then why evangelize him?
In the interpretation of these two texts, MacArthur contradicts himself, where, on the one hand, the principle, if it fell away from the church, means it was never saved by the predetermined God, and on the other hand, it needs to be evangelized, but it is not clear why, since the doctrine of predestination shows, that nothing will help such a person.
It is interesting that the doctrine of predestination of some people for salvation, and others for destruction, does not come from the Calvinists, but was formed long ago in Islam. In fact, the doctrine of predestination corresponds to the words of the Qur'an, where the following words are said:
- “We have created many genies and people for Gehenna. They have hearts that do not understand, and eyes that do not see, and ears that do not hear. They are like beasts, but they are even more deluded. They are the reckless ignoramuses. ”(Quran 7: 179);
- “... So Allah misleads whomever He wills, and leads whomever He wills in a straight path.” (Quran 74:31).
The doctrine of predestination is very consistent with the Qur'an, because it turns out that God determined a part of people for salvation, which means that other people were originally determined for eternal destruction, which leads to the idea that they were originally created for this. Therefore, we can say that this is not only a Calvinistic teaching, but also a Muslim one, which appeared earlier than Calvinism.
In fact, in the 8th chapter of the Epistle to the Romans it is not said about predestination from the beginning of the creation of the world for some people for salvation, which is not in the text, but it is about the dignity and hope of Christians, and that God predestinated Christians to be like the image of His Son, oh than we read in the text again: "For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be like the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. And whom He predestined, those He also called, and whom He called, those He also justified; and whom He justified, those He also glorified" (Epistle Romans 8: 29-30)... From the text we see that God made a predestination to be similar to the image of Christ, to those people whom He foreknew. The word "foresee", according to the explanatory dictionaries of Ushakov and Efremova, means "to know in advance." That is, God predestined those about whom He knew in advance that they would respond to His call. In other words, the initial is God's knowledge of the future in advance, and only then the predestination of already saved people, so that they are similar to the image of Christ. MacArthur, on the other hand, says: "here, rather, it is talking about the choice of those who will be touched by His love." Let us emphasize once again that we are talking about the predestination "to be like the image of Christ" for already saved Christians, and not about the predestination for the salvation of a certain number of people. This text of the Bible does not speak at all about saved and unsaved people, and the predestination to perish someone, all this is not in the text. The text itself clearly emphasizes God's attitude towards people who responded to His call, and describes the honor for the saved person. John MacArthur, like the Calvinists, did not see the purpose of predestination, and what constitutes a group of predestined people.
Forgiveness... A large number of conflicting statements by John MacArthur led him to a natural result - a conflicting understanding of forgiveness of sins and salvation. To see what MacArthur thinks about forgiveness, look at the following Bible passage, where Christ says the following about forgiveness: "and if you will not forgive people their sins, your Father will not forgive you your sins" (Matthew 6:15)... Let's see what MacArthur's understanding of this text is: “It is not intended here that God will leave without justification those who have already received the forgiveness that He gives to all believers. Forgiveness, as a permanent and complete deliverance from guilt and the negative consequences of sin, belongs to all who are in Christ (cf. John 5:24; Rom. 8: 1; Eph. 1: 7). In addition, Scripture tells us that God punishes those who disobey Him (Heb. 12: 5-7). Believers must confess their sins in order to be cleansed from sin daily (1 John 1: 9). This kind of forgiveness is a simple cleansing from worldly corruption by sin; he does not repeat the cleansing from sin that is given to us with justification. It is comparable to washing your feet instead of taking a bath (cf. John 13:10). Such forgiveness is denied by God to those Christians who do not forgive others. ”- MacArthur Study Bible)... With a non-Biblical position on predestination, MacArthur naturally falls into the trap when it comes to forgiveness and unforgiveness. After all, it is difficult to combine predestination with the unforgiveness of already believing people, and therefore MacArthur made, in fact, the assertion that a person not forgiven by God has salvation. Such a statement directly contradicts the context of the Bible, because in the Bible forgiveness and atonement are inseparable from each other, for example, we read: "in whom we have redemption by His blood and the remission of sins" (Colossians 1:14)... If God does not forgive man's sin, then MacArthur says that a sinner can enter the Kingdom of God, but to this the Apostle Peter asks John MacArthur a question: "And if the righteous is barely saved, where will the wicked and sinful appear?" (1 Peter 4:18)... Of course, MacArthur has already given his answer to this question, but only it does not correspond to the Biblical teaching, because according to the Bible, nothing unclean will enter the Kingdom of God, about which it is written: "And nothing unclean will enter into him, and no one who is devoted to abomination and lies, but only those which are written by the Lamb in the book of life" (Revelation 21:27)... A person who will not be forgiven for sin is unclean and sinful, and such people cannot be in the Kingdom of God, no matter how MacArthur wants it.
Output... Despite the fact that the MacArthur Study Bible contains a lot of useful information, the dogmatic part of it is periodically contradictory, and does not correspond to the Biblical text. John MacArthur, as a non-denominational pastor of the church, made a synthesis of various teachings from different Christian denominations, which was reflected in his commentaries on the Bible. Therefore, MacArthur's Study Bible is a specific and controversial collection of Bible interpretations.
Address: P.O. Box 265, Washington, PA 15301-0265, USA
In his thirty years of ministry, John MacArthur achieved worldwide influence through his Grace to You radio broadcasts, over two dozen books, twelve million cassettes, Church of Grace and other energetic ventures. Undoubtedly, his religious influence and Calvinist interpretations of Scripture have permeated the lives of countless practicing believers around the world.
Long ago, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, MacArthur waged a theological war over saving faith, especially with Charles Ryrie and Zane Hodge. It was then that John MacArthur wrote one of his most famous books, The Gospel According to Jesus. He even produced his own Study Bible called the MacArthur Study Bible.
Prior to that theological war, in the 1980s, John MacArthur received notoriety in secular newspapers in the United States because his church was persecuted for the suicide of Kenneth Nally, who received "advice" from those who worked in the "Church of the Commonwealth of Grace" and subsequently followed his. [For details, see The Conditional Safety of the Believer, pp. 460-462 (1).]
In his books and sound lessons, unlike many others who accept the theory of "eternal security," John MacArthur sometimes pretends to be a teacher of holiness, but this is nothing more than a temporary doctrine and a smokescreen on his part, which has seduced many to undeservedly exalt his ministry. and accept the phraseology of his teachings and his concept of saving faith. Unfortunately, even some Christians who reject the "eternal security" theory have been misled by his ostentatious declared holiness!
The purpose of this pamphlet is to reveal some of the controversial and unbiblical claims of John MacArthur's holiness teachings, as well as to reveal his surprisingly careless tolerance for sin in the lives of Christians. It should be understood that John MacArthur is a Calvinist and, therefore, the teacher of the concept of "eternal security" (also called the persistence of the saints or the theory of "saved once - saved forever", in abbreviated form of SOSN). Consequently, his beloved teaching of “saved once, saved forever” does not really allow him to teach true holiness according to its biblical definition. As you can see for yourself, this is impossible. In addition, he cannot truly understand the essence of saving faith, because he only knows how to interpret Scripture in order to stay in line with the false doctrine of "saved once - saved forever", just like other similar teachers. Therefore, there will always be gaps in his theology and primary problems remain, because his vital positions are destructively flawed.
Was never originally saved
Unlike the once-saved-forever-saved theory teacher Charles Stanley, who teaches the incredible assumption that a Christian can completely stop believing and still be saved (2), John MacArthur would say that such a person was never really in the first place. saved. John MacArthur would have given the same deliberate response for a man who had a convincing Christian testimony for many years, but later departed from the Lord and never returned!
Consequently, his teachings leave a real zealous follower of Jesus in the uncertainty of whether he is truly a true follower or a deceiver who will later go away never to return! It is during these explanations of his version of saving faith that he often hides how far a true Christian can go in sin while still calling it saving faith and holy life. Knowing John MacArthur's real beliefs about how far a Christian can go in sin, with his version of saving faith, brings to light his hidden idea of holiness and brings him to the same level as Charles Stanley, Charles Ryrie and Zane Hodge, even though he is believes in repentance in order to be initially saved. (3) If you are one of many, you probably do not know this.
Sometimes it seems that MacArthurteaches against sin andemphasizes holiness. The following five quotes are a small selection of statements to show how John MacArthur sometimes condemns sin in the Christian life. With these statements he deceived many regarding his other teachings on sin:
John contrasts the children of God with the children of Satan in terms of their actions. While those who are truly born again reflect the habit of righteousness, Satan's children practice sin ... A third reason why Christians cannot practice sin ... (4)
And if we do not understand how abominable our sin is, we will not understand its consequences. (5)
Since God Himself is holy, He wants His people to be holy. A holy life distinguishes us from the world. (6)
A holy life will give you courage before God. To do this, you need to regularly confess and forgive sins. (7)
And when we learn about personal sin, we must make it our lifelong habit to immediately free ourselves from it. The threat of sin also makes us spiritually anxious. (eight)
John MacArthur seems to emphasize holy behavior, apostasy from sin, and cultivating a lifelong habit of immediate deliverance from personal sin, but this is part of the great deception associated with his ministry and teaching. The other side of his doctrine of sin is not well known, but is just as integral to his doctrine and ministry.
Exposing MacArthur's viewsabout sin and temptation
Prepare to hear about the other side of John MacArthur's teachings about sin in the Christian life, which is also linked to the Calvinist "once saved - saved forever" theory and the false version of saving faith that it spawned:
... Sin does not cause spiritual death of the believer ... (9)
Temptation also works for our good. The main reason is that it makes us dependent on God ... Temptation also works for our good, because it makes us yearn for heaven. (ten)
God promises that everything ultimately works for our good, including the worst: sin. His promise does not diminish the ugliness of sin or the beauty of holiness. Sin is truly evil and deserves an eternal hell. But in His infinite wisdom, God rejects sin for our good. (eleven)
Although God has supreme authority to make our sin work for good, we should never view this wonderful promise as a license to sin. (12)
Important: Did you know that John MacArthur, who from time to time creates the illusion of teaching the holy life, proclaims that the Christian's sin works for the good? Would you like to hear him tell us about how sin worked for personal good in the lives of Adam and Eve, kings David, Saul and Solomon, Judas Iscariot, Ananias and Sapphira, Hymeneus, Philetus, people from Heb. 6: 4-6; 10: 26-29, etc.? Also, if temptation really works for our good, then why does Jesus tell us to pray lest we fall into temptation (Matt. 6:13)? To believe this lie of Calvinism and the theory of eternal security that sin and temptation work for good is to teach a license to debauchery, just as Jude said (Jude 3: 4), even though it will obviously be outright rejected!
MacArthur's deadly teachings
In his so-called Study Bible, John MacArthur also reveals his deadly teaching on sin in the Christian life:
No sin - past, future, or present - that a believer can commit can be imputed to him, since the punishment was paid for by Christ, and righteousness was imputed to the believer. And no sin will ever change this decision of the Divine Law ... (13)
In His providence, God organizes every event in life — even suffering, temptation, and sin — in order to accomplish both temporary and eternal good deeds for us ... (14)
The believer can never be found guilty ... (15)
Some people who followed such patterns of sinful life fell back into those old sins and needed a reminder that if they returned completely to their old lives, they would not inherit eternal salvation because their lifestyle indicated that they had never been saved before ... (16)
The Calvinist John MacArthur makes God the creator of temptation and sin. (Read the real truth in James 1:13.) Did you know that John MacArthur actually teaches that Christians must completely return to their former life as unbelievers before their sinful behavior indicates that they never really were saved? If they stop on this sinful path, only slightly not reaching its end, then they remain saved and have saving faith, even though they were and may still be in almost all those old disgusting sins that sent them to hell. until they receive their initial salvation.
The way and the foundations of life
Lifestyle and lifestyle are two of the key terms John MacArthur uses to describe his deceptive version of saving faith. Concerning them, he teaches the following:
While believers can and do these sins [the list of sins is given in 1 Cor. 6: 9,10], they are not the foundations of their life. (17)
God never allows sin, which has no place at all in His Kingdom, just as there is no place in His Kingdom for any person whose lifestyle is habitual debauchery, uncleanness, or greed (see verse 3), because none of such people is saved ... (eighteen)
Usually John MacArthur does not finish his story about how far you can go without becoming a practicing sinner or calling it the foundations of life. However, he tells us which foundations of life did not find a place in the life of King David (and Lot):
Didn't David commit murder and adultery and let his sin go unconfessed for at least a year? Didn't Lot make a worldly compromise in the midst of heinous sin? Yes, these examples prove that true believers are capable of the worst sins imaginable. But David and Lot cannot serve as examples of “carnal” believers, whose whole lifestyle and desires are not at all different from unrepentant people. (19)
Note: According to the way John MacArthur uses the term foundations of life, David was both an adulterer and a murderer for at least a year, but according to him, during this time, David was a believer with saving faith! (John MacArthur is no different from all other eternal security teachers, always trying to get Scripture to allow unholy behavior in a believer's life.)
So if you know a person claiming to be a Christian and living as holy as David was at that time, then (according to John MacArthur) that person must have a saving faith and also have a salvation that he can never lose (no matter how heinous his sins may become) until he fully returns to his old life, and only this will show that he was never really saved. On the contrary, the Bible lays out a completely different version of saving faith and condemns John MacArthur as a false teacher. See Jude 3.4. Obviously, no adulterer or murderer is saved as long as he abides in these sins without repentance (Rev. 21: 8; 1 John 3:15; 1 Cor. 6: 9,10; etc.).
[By the way, the teachers of the "saved once - saved forever" theory seem to be reading the Scriptures to validate their sinful message of eternal security by saying things like the above about Lot. It is impossible to prove from Scripture that Lot was a worldly compromise in the midst of heinous sin. At least until he was brought out of Sodom, he did not commit sins for which he could be condemned (see Ezek. 18:26; 33:13; Ps. 125: 5). According to the testimony of the apostle Peter, Lot was righteous while living in Sodom (2 Pet. 2: 8).]
A generalization of MacArthur's idea of saving faith and holiness
As a summary, John MacArthur's phony teachings of saving faith and holiness declare the following:
A true Christian with saving faith can commit the occasional act of adultery and drunkenness. (Hence there are some Christian adulterers and Christian drunkards.)
A true Christian with saving faith can kill himself (be suicidal) and subsequently go to heaven, even though he died as an unrepentant murderer.
A true Christian can commit sins listed in 1 Cor. 6: 9,10, just about going back to his old life and still have saving faith. Here's the excerpt and list, in case the reader isn't familiar with it:
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor malaki, nor sodomy, nor thieves, nor covetous people, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor predators, will inherit the Kingdom of God.
No sin, even the most heinous one, including child abuse, violence, murder, homosexuality, etc. never prevents a previously saved person from entering heaven. (This is the same view that Hodge, Ryrie, and Stanley are making.)
Sin works for the Christian's good!
A person who does not have saving faith is one whose essence of character lies in the fact that he practices their [sins] continuously and without repentance ... (20).
Therefore, any behavior that is even slightly better than continuous and unrepentant sinning can describe a person who has saving faith and goes to heaven according to the theory of “saved once - saved forever”, despite the fact that he may live in many sins cited in 1 Cor. 6: 9.10.
Matthew 7: 20-29
One of the most common responses of the proponents of the theory "once saved - saved forever" is the phrase "he was never actually saved in the first place", which is indeed true sometimes, but not always, when a person turns away from God after some time has shown the fruits of redemption. The main passage quoted by such "saved once and for all" people, especially John MacArthur and other Calvinists, is from Matt. 7:23. Let's go back to Matt. 7: 20-29 to better understand the context:
Mt. 7:20 So you will know them by their fruits.
In this verse, Jesus said that we can recognize (or identify) a person by their fruit. According to the context, this is especially true of the false prophet, who is actually a ravenous wolf in sheep's clothing. As we read a few more verses further, we learn that such fruit is not (1) a prophecy in the name of Christ; (2) not casting out spirits in the name of Christ, or (3) not working miracles. (This will be proved in more detail later.)
Who will enter the Kingdom of Heaven
Mt. 7:21 Not everyone who says to Me: “Lord! Lord! ”, Will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in Heaven.
It may come as a surprise to some that both saved and unsaved people call Jesus Lord. Despite the context of verse 21, there are many people who are deceived into the trap of pseudo-Christian cults (such as Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormonism, etc.) who call Jesus their Lord.
Moreover, Matt. 7:21 is a particularly important verse because it talks about who will ultimately enter the kingdom of heaven. Jesus, who also gave us the promises of the text of John. 3:16, here clearly said:
"... but he who does the will of My Father in Heaven."
The word "performing" in Greek is a present participle, which expresses a continuous or periodically repeated action. This same important truth about ultimate salvation - the real entry into the Kingdom of God - is repeated elsewhere in Scripture:
“He answered and said to them: My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it” (Luke 8:21).
Returning to Matt. 7:21, we ask, what is the will of the Father? John 6:40 says:This is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have eternal life; and I will raise him up on the last day.
Therefore, as long as we continue to see the Son and believe in Jesus, we are doing the will of the Father and we will have eternal life. (The believer's sacrament has an extended tense in Greek.) Obedience and good works are inextricably linked to saving faith in Jesus. Notice how obvious this is from the next verse:
And those who have done good will go forth into the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil into the resurrection of condemnation. (John 5:29).
To those who by persistence in a good deed seek glory, honor and immortality - eternal life (Rom. 2: 7).
What is the use, my brethren, if someone says that he has faith but has no works? can this faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and has no daily food, and one of you tells them: “go in peace, warm yourself and eat,” but does not give them what they need for the body: what is the use? Likewise, faith, if it has no works, is dead in itself (John 2: 14-17).
Unceasingly remembering your work of faith and labor of love and patience of trust in our Lord Jesus Christ before our God and Father (1 Thess. 1: 3).
Through whom we received grace and apostleship, so that in His name we might subdue all nations to faith (Rom. 1: 5).
So real, true saving faith in Jesus will always coexist with obedience and good works.
Mt. 7:22, 23 Many will say to Me on that day: Lord! God! Did we not prophesy in your name? and did they not drive out demons in your name? and did not you perform many miracles in your name? And then I will declare to them: I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of iniquity ...
Obviously, such people were never saved, as evidenced by the words "I never knew you." Compare this to the following:“I am the good shepherd; and I know Mine, and Mine know Me. " (John 10:14).The same Greek word translated “know” is used in both places to refer to a personal relationship with Jesus (or salvation).How surprised we really should be when we read the passage from Matt. 7, which shows that religious people who have never been saved can perform miracles, cast out demons, and accurately prophesy, and what other scriptures clearly prove?
Unsaved People Can Give a Self-fulfilling Prophecy
In addition, the unsaved person can prophesy and make the prophecy come true:
If a prophet or a dreamer rises among you and presents you with a sign or a miracle, and that sign or miracle about which he told you will come true, and moreover says: “Let us go after some other gods, whom you do not know, and we will serve them”, - then do not listen to the words of this prophet, or this dreamer; for through this the Lord your God tempts you, in order to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul (Deut. 13: 1-3).
One of them, a certain Caiaphas, being the high priest that year, said to them: you do not know anything, and you won’t think that it is better for us that one person should die for people than that the whole nation should perish. But he did not say this on his own behalf, but, being the high priest that year, foretold that Jesus would die for the people (John 11: 49-51).
Unsaved people and demons canperform great miracles
Perhaps the most surprising fact is that unsaved people can perform great miracles! The Magi performed them at Pharaoh's judgment, as the false prophet will do on behalf of the Antichrist:
Moses and Aaron came to Pharaoh and did as the Lord commanded. And Aaron threw down his rod before Pharaoh and before his servants, and it became a serpent. And Pharaoh called for wise men and sorcerers; and these wise men of Egypt did the same with their enchantments: each of them threw down his rod, and they became serpents, but the rod of Aaron swallowed up their rods. (Ex. 7: 10-12).
And [the false prophet] does great signs, so that fire also brings down fire from heaven to earth in front of people. (Rev. 13:13).
And the beast was captured and with him a false prophet, who performed miracles before him, with which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and worshiped his image: both living were thrown into the lake of fire, burning with sulfur (Rev. 19:20).
Even demons can perform miracles:
These are demonic spirits that do signs; they go out to the kings of the earth of the entire universe to gather them for battle on that great day of God the Almighty. (Rev. 16:14).
An unsaved person can cast out demons
An unsaved person can even cast out demons! Besides Matt. 7:22 this same truth is shown elsewhere:
And if I drive out demons by the power of Beelzebub, then by whose power do your sons drive them out? Therefore, they will be your judges (Matt. 12:27).
Even some of the wandering Jewish exorcists began to use the name of the Lord Jesus over those who had evil spirits, saying: We conjure you by Jesus, whom Paul preaches. This was done by some seven sons of the Jewish high priest Sceva. But the evil spirit answered: I know Jesus, and I know Paul, but who are you? (Acts 19: 13-15).
Therefore, if we had never read Matt. 7: 22,23 we would still know that according to Scripture, some religious and unsaved people can prophesy faithfully, perform miracles, and even cast out demons. Also, clergymen sometimes do similar things, but still go to the lake of fire (Rev. 21: 8). Some believe that Jesus in Matt. 7: 22,23 spoke of the occultists. (On the other hand, in the book of Acts, we also see that true Christians did the same: they prophesied faithfully, performed miracles, and even cast out demons in the name of Christ, but these religious acts are still not the fruit or evidence of their salvation.)
Matthew 7:23
The key in Matt. 7: 20-24 is definitely verse 23! Those referred to were inveterate wicked (New International Version of the Bible) or practicing lawlessness (King James Version, Russian Synodal Translation) or practicing lawlessness (New American Standard Bible), even though they were casting out demons at the same time , performed miracles and prophesied in the name of the Lord! Their constant acts of lawlessness are the fruit by which, as Jesus says in verse 20, we can determine a person's spiritual status. Remember also the supporting verses:
The children of God and the children of the devil are recognized in this way: everyone who does not practice righteousness is not from God, nor is he who does not love his brother (1 John 3:10).
Children! let no one deceive you. Whoever does righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous. Whoever commits sin is of the devil, because the devil sinned first (1 John 3: 7,8).
The Lord's apostles taught that we can distinguish the children of the devil from the children of God by their current behavior, that is, by what they do, what they do not do, or by their love. This is a true Christian teaching, although, in our dark times, it is often rejected and despised.
Also, the same Greek word translated "lawlessness" in Matt. 7:23 can be found in other scriptures as well. It translates in the English version as "wickedness", i.e. "sinfulness":because of the multiplication of iniquity, love will grow cold in many (Matt. 24:12).
Who gave Himself for us to deliver us from all iniquity and to cleanse for Himself a special people, zealous for good works (Titus 2:14).
Today's Workers of Lawlessness Are Not Christians
Those who practice lawlessness at this time are not Christians. Such people can be divided into two types: (1) those who were never saved (or have always been unbelievers) and (2) those who were once saved and subsequently lost their salvation. One example among many is those who have returned to their sin, like a dog returning to its vomit (2 Pet. 2: 20-22). In other words, those who practice lawlessness in Matt. 7:23, in general, they committed a sin, and, nevertheless, they also performed religious deeds in the name of Christ: they worked miracles, cast out demons, prophesied. Awesome!
Jesus' Final Words
Jesus taught as one with authority:
Therefore, everyone who hears these words of Mine and does them, I will liken to a wise man who built his house on a rock; and the rain fell, and the rivers overflowed, and the winds blew, and rushed on that house, and it did not fall, because it was founded on a stone. And everyone who hears these words of Mine and does not fulfill them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand; and the rain fell, and the rivers overflowed, and the winds blew, and beat on that house; and he fell, and his fall was great. And when Jesus finished these words, the people marveled at His teaching, for He taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes and Pharisees. (Matt. 7: 24-29).
Note that in the Lord's closing words of this key passage, He simply said that there are only two types of people: (1) The Discreet who listen to these words of Mine and do them and (2) The Foolish who listen to these words of Mine and do not performs them. The workers of lawlessness (in Matthew 7:23) belonged to the latter group, not fulfilling the words of Jesus. Therefore, Jesus never knew them. Such religious people have never shown the evidence of their salvation that accompanies the true transformation that many others have, who have nevertheless returned to their old lives of sin and selfishness, like all those who depart from the faith (1 Tim. 4: 1 ), were shipwrecked in faith (1 Tim. 1: 19,20), fell away from grace (Gal. 5: 2,4), etc., about which, as well as many like them, neither the Lord nor His apostles never said that they were never originally saved. In addition, the words “were never originally saved” are never used in the New Testament to refer to such people.
Disguised license to debauchery
Undoubtedly, many people have a misconception about John MacArthur and his teachings on saving faith. In fact, they do not know what he teaches about sin in the life of a true believer, since he sometimes (and at the same time contradictory) says that if a person returns to lawlessness after turning to God, then he has never really been saved. ... On other occasions, however, when the same issue is raised, he states that saints sometimes go astray, committing grievous sins but still being saved, which is a typical Calvinist belief.
Like other teachers of the "saved once - saved forever" theory, the esteemed John MacArthur contradicts himself. Note, in addition, what information about sin this person published in print. In his commentary on 1 Cor. 6: 9, he wrote:
While believers can and do these sins, they are not the foundations of their lives. (21)
Let me refresh your memory about 1 Cor. 6: 9, since this author writes about the sins cited in this passage:
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor malas, nor soddlers.
Therefore, according to John MacArthur, a true believer (or Christian) with saving faith can commit these sins and remain saved without repentance! Why isn't he here saying that if this happens, then this sin-practicing Christian was never originally saved, as he teaches on other occasions? In fact, this quote clearly shows that MacArthur is actually offering a disguised license to debauchery!
If they are completely back to their old life
Let me repeat the quote from John MacArthur's Study Bible again. This quote refers to what was said in 1 Cor. 6:11:
Some who followed such patterns of sinful living fell back into those old sins and needed a reminder that if they returned completely to their old lives, they would not inherit eternal salvation, because such a lifestyle indicates that they never were. saved. (22)
Have you noticed a contradiction in his statement? He mentioned some who followed [past times] such patterns of sinful life. For this reason, his affirmation implies freedom from the bondage of sin only for some time! According to the Bible, this is only due to contact with the blood of Jesus, which occurs at the time of acceptance of true salvation. Among others, another passage of Holy Scripture is obvious - Rev. 1: 5:
To Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His blood.
The claim that one can be freed from sin without contact with the blood of Christ at the time of salvation is heresy in itself. Moreover, according to John MacArthur, such people would have to completely return to their former life in order to prove that they were never saved! Thus, if Christians commit adultery, drink and steal 5 times a week instead of 6-8 times (which is only slightly less than what they did before they were born again), then according to John MacArthur's version of grace and saving faith with salvation from such active Christians everything is in order, and they demonstrate that they were saved all the time they did these wicked deeds. In addition, until they fully return back to their former life, they demonstrate their salvation by being simultaneously in exactly the same sins that pull others to hell.
First, John MacArthur talks about patience to the end on the path of righteousness and holiness, and then turns around and declares that a person remains saved even while he commits the sins listed in 1 Cor. 6: 9! Obviously, committing these sins is not a holy life, especially if they end their lives by committing suicide, after which the previously saved person will go to Heaven, as John MacArthur previously taught (according to his teaching, such a person will only be sent to judgment)!
The question must be asked: why?
The question must also be asked: why are some people who once demonstrated evidence of saving grace and then deserted bearing the stigma “were never originally saved,” and others like them, are not at the same time like King David, who committed adultery and murder, and Solomon, whose heart turned to idolatry after decades of faithful service to God? While David returned to God, Solomon never returned to Him. He is an example of someone who has completely and completely lost saving faith.
Study Bibles or indoctrination Bibles?
The so-called Study Bibles that are sold in the so-called Christian bookstores are not real study Bibles, as they contain much more than just maps, charts, or information about weights, units of measure, etc. Many of their annotations (interpretations), such as those by John MacArthur that you just read, are actually dangerous, false teachings taught by the teachers of the "saved once, saved forever" theory. They need to be named more accurately: Bibles for indoctrination of people's minds, because that is what they often do. Worse, when the lie of the "saved once, saved forever" theory is taught in these study Bibles, it actually infects the perfectly beautiful Bible in its purest form with this lie that is contained alongside Divine truth.
Thus, if a person takes the position of a publisher and believes in the doctrine of "saved once, saved forever", like John MacArthur, this deadly theological lie will slip into their so-called study Bible, posing eternal danger to anyone who mistakenly believes that such notes and comments are useful. to understand the text. (Other so-called study Bibles containing dangerous deception besides the John MacArthur Bible are Ryrie's Study Bible, Scofield's Annotated Bible, New Geneva Study Bible, and Holman's Christian Standard Bible, to name just a few!)
Sin as a way of life
Another term that John MacArthur uses when he teaches about sin is sin as a way of life. (Some people who claim to reject the doctrine of "once saved - saved forever" also teach this erroneous doctrine of sin as a way of life, harming their followers, and they, like John MacArthur, are condemned by Jude 3. 4.) You may have heard John MacArthur and others use this term.
Salvation can be lost due to one sin!
Over the years that I obeyed the command to fight for faith against the doctrine of "saved once - saved forever" (Jude 3: 4), I have met some people who claim that they reject the doctrine of "saved once - saved forever", but then teach that a Christian may engage in random acts of adultery, drunkenness, theft, etc. and stay saved. They usually deny that David lost his salvation when he committed adultery and murder until he repented of them. Others said that salvation can be lost, but it is very difficult to achieve this. One person even stated that before you lose your salvation, you must tell God that you are rejecting Him. Is there Bible evidence for these claims? Is there any basis for them? Or does Scripture say that salvation can be lost after a single act of certain sin? (Please remember that all sins have different degrees of severity: some lead to [spiritual] death, while others do not, according to 1 John 5: 16,17.)
How many times should a righteous person fall into sexual immorality, drunkenness, theft, etc. to lose your salvation? Should this become a way of life or an ongoing sin? Is it necessary, as some have argued, to begin practicing sin in order to become unsaved or to demonstrate a complete lack of original salvation? Let's take a look at the word of God.
Hard facts
Returning to the important and already mentioned passage of Scripture, let us recall once again how one of the original teachers of grace proclaimed:
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor malaki, nor soddlers, nor thieves, nor covetous people, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor predators, will inherit the Kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6: 9,10).
According to the above passage of Scripture, any person who falls under this description will not inherit the Kingdom of God. So how difficult is it biblically to become an adulterer or anyone on this list? Should a person practice adultery before biblically speaking, they become an adulterer? Should this become a way of life? Here are the facts:
If anyone commits adultery with a married wife, if someone commits adultery with his neighbor's wife, let both the adulterer and the adulteress be put to death. (Lev. 20:10)
As just shown, the definition of the word adulterer is consistent with the Word of God - it is one who commits adultery. Therefore, anyone who commits one or more acts of adultery is an adulterer. The same can be said by analogy for the other words in bold in 1 Cor. 6: 9.10. Their definition is one who commits a certain act, whether it is theft, drunkenness, idolatry, or the like. To become a fornicator, an idolater, an adulterer, a malak, a sodomy, a thief, a covetous man, a drunkard, a revolting or a predator from Cor. 6: 9,10 you do not need to do these acts 5, 16, or 113 times, or to start a dissolute life. Based on the example above with the word "adulterer," this becomes crystal clear.
This does not require continuous sinning.
or lead a sinful life
Other scriptures reveal this same powerful truth, refuting the notion that continuous sin or sin as a way of life is the only way to lose salvation (or to demonstrate that a person was never actually saved). For example:
If someone hits someone with an iron weapon so that he dies, then he is a murderer: the murderer must be put to death; (Numbers 35:16)
In addition, a single act of murder makes a person a murderer. (This includes suicides who are their own killers.)
Such a single act of sin will exclude any person from the Kingdom of God if he does not repent (of course, not only in words):
But the fearful and the unfaithful, and the abominable and murderers, and the fornicators and sorcerers, and idolaters and all liars, their lot will be in a lake that burns with fire and brimstone. This is the second death. (Rev. 21: 8)
Someone might argue that in the text of Rev. 21: 8 refers only to unbelievers, but the words "fearful and unbelieving" include all apostate Christians on this list. Only a person who was once faithful to God can sin with the sin of unfaithfulness.
Denial of Jesus
The Lord Jesus said the following to the already saved people:
but whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father in Heaven. (Matthew 10:33)
Later we learn that all the first apostles, except for Judas, who betrayed Jesus, denied the Lord:
Then Jesus says to them: All of you will be offended about Me this night, for it is written: I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered; after my resurrection, I will go before you into Galilee. Peter answered and said to him: if all will be offended about you, I will never be offended. Jesus said to him: Truly I say to you, this night, before the cock crows, you will deny Me three times. Peter says to Him: Even though I ought to have died with You, I will not deny You. All the disciples said the same. (Matt. 26: 31-35)
So how difficult was it for Peter and the other sheep to deny Jesus and be offended? It turned out to be not very difficult, and soon it happened, as it was written:
Peter was sitting outside in the courtyard. And a certain maid came up to him and said: You also were with Jesus the Galilean. But he denied it before everyone, saying: I do not know what you are talking about. When he was leaving the gate, another saw him, and said to those who were there: this one was also with Jesus of Nazareth. And again he denied with an oath that he did not know this Man. A little later, those who were standing there came up and said to Peter: Surely you are one of them, for your speech also denounces you. Then he began to swear and swear that he did not know This Man. And suddenly a cock crowed. And Peter remembered the word that Jesus had spoken to him: Before the cock crows, you will deny Me three times. And when he went out, he wept bitterly. (Matt. 26: 69-75)
Just like Peter, a true Christian can deny (or be tempted) Jesus. This is what the apostle Peter did, denying that he was with Jesus or knew Him. He didn’t need to tell God, “I don’t want to know You,” and he didn’t need to do it all the time, leading this way of life. These words of Peter were enough for Jesus to deny him! If Jesus denies you, then you can no longer be His sheep, just like other unsaved people. Christians are described as the property of God: His sheep (John 10: 26,27; 21: 16,16), His bride (Rev. 19: 7), His body (Eph. 5:23; Col. 1:24); etc.
Adam and eve
The first act of human disobedience in the Bible occurred in Gen. 3. God warned Adam, the son of God (Luke 3:38), that on the day he ate of the tree of the “knowledge of good and evil,” he would die (Gen. 2:17). This is precisely what happened as a result of one single act of sin. This was not their usual practice or way of life, it was just one single act of sin that led both Adam and Eve to their spiritual death.
David did lawlessness
In a shocking way, even people who are extremely strong in the faith can subsequently get lost to the point of committing a sin that leads to death. This is what David did. His obvious sins were: one act of adultery and one act of murder, which would exclude him from the Kingdom of God and bring him into the lake of fire (1 Cor. 6: 9,10; Rev. 21: 8). For at least 9 months, he was, according to the Bible, an adulterer and murderer due to his exceptional acts of adultery and murder.
Nathan said to David:
Why then did you neglect the word of the Lord, doing evil in His sight? You struck Uriah the Hittite with the sword; You took his wife to be your wife, and you killed him with the sword of the Ammonites. (2 Kings 12: 9)
Point out what David did evil. You might say that this is not a great revelation of truth at all. Of course, adultery and murder are evil. But false teachers, some of whom say they reject the doctrine of "eternal security," would claim that David did not lose his salvation, even though 1 Cor. 6: 9,10 and Rev. 21: 8 is so clear. When the text of 2 Sam. 12: 9 is considered in conjunction with this and the next passage, we have even stronger evidence that David lost his salvation during that dark time of his life.
David died spiritually when he sinned
When I tell the righteous that he will live, and he will rely on his righteousness and will do an untruth, then all his righteous deeds will not be remembered, and he will die from his unrighteousness, which he did. (Ezek. 33:13)
Those who do a lie, as David did, die spiritually according to the above. The next passage is even more compelling evidence that for a time David lost his salvation:
And the righteous, if he turns away from his righteousness and acts unrighteously, will do all the abominations that the wicked do, will he live? All his good deeds that he did will not be remembered; for his iniquity, which he does, and for his sins, in which he sinned, he will die. (Ezekiel 18:24)
When a righteous man departed from his righteousness and began to do iniquity, then he will die for that. (Ezek. 33:18)
If a righteous man deviates from his righteousness and commits iniquity and dies for this, then he dies for his iniquity, which he did. (Ezekiel 18:26)
Unfortunately, some reject the clarity of these passages of Scripture and try to distort the facts to say that David did not lose his salvation (did not die) after committing adultery and murder. Such a person is also bad or even worse than a teacher of the theory of "eternal security", even though he may appear to deny the doctrine of "eternal security".
Note: Severe warnings from Ezek. 18: 24.26; 33: 13,18 are not purely hypothetical, as some claim, for they came true for David.
Even David knew that during that time period he was doing iniquity and therefore was spiritually dead due to his sin:
Have mercy on me, O God, according to Thy great mercy, and according to the multitude of Thy compassions blot out my iniquities. Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin, for I acknowledge my iniquities, and my sin is always before me. To Thee, Thee only, have I sinned and done evil in Thy sight, so that Thou art righteous in Thy judgment and pure in Thy judgment. (Ps. 50: 3-6)
Also, some people like to misuse Ps. 50 to argue that David only lost the joy of his salvation. They are somehow missing the point that, according to the last quote, David humbly and sadly asked God for mercy because of his sins. Thus, this prayer of his is similar to the one that Jesus said the repentant tax collector was saved and justified:
The tax collector, standing in the distance, did not even dare to raise his eyes to heaven; but, striking himself in the chest, he said: God! be merciful to me a sinner! I tell you that this one went to his house justified more than that one: for everyone who exalts himself will be humiliated, but he who humbles himself will be exalted. (Luke 18: 13,14)
After David prayed for mercy, forgiveness (and salvation), he also asked for other things, such as the return of the joy of his salvation (Ps. 50:14). Psalm 50 is the prayer of an apostate.
Don't look back from the plow The Lord must have shocked the people of his day with many of His teachings, including the following:
But Jesus said to him: no one who has laid his hand on the plow and looks back is not trustworthy for the Kingdom of God (Luke 9:62, New American Standard Bible, Russian Synodal Translation)
Another translation says:
But Jesus said to him: No one who has laid his hand on the plow and looks back is not fit to serve in the Kingdom of God (Luke 9:62 New International Version)
There is no significant difference between these two translations, because those who enter the Kingdom of Heaven will serve Him there (Rev. 22: 3). Those who are not fit for service in the Kingdom of Heaven will not enter it, but will fall into a lake burning with fire and sulfur. Any way of looking back will exclude a person from the Kingdom of Heaven.
God wants us to be faithful to Him and love Him more than anything or anyone in this world. Look at 1 John. 2:15 am. The Lord attaches salvation to Christian faithfulness (Matthew 10: 37-39; Luke 14: 26,33). Jacob also says:
Adulters and adulterers! do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity against God? So, whoever wants to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God (James 4: 4).
NS Christians who decide to become friends of the world again become enemies of God, i.e. as they were before they were saved. It is like committing spiritual adultery. Think of Lot's wife who looked back and died (Gen. 19:26). Jesus remembered her:
Remember Lot's wife. Whoever preserves his soul will destroy it, but whoever destroys it will revive it (Luke 17:32, 33)
Your words
People find it hard to believe that some words can expose a person to hell of fire, but this is exactly what Jesus taught:
But I tell you that everyone who is angry with his brother in vain is liable to judgment; whoever says to his brother: "cancer" is subject to the Sanhedrin; and whoever says, "foolish," is subject to fiery hell. (Matthew 5:22)
Through this single act, such an extreme danger of fiery hell becomes a reality even for people who were once saved. These parallels exist with another truth about words that Jesus also taught:
But I tell you that for every idle word that people say, they will give an answer on the day of judgment: for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned. (Matthew 12:37)
Your words can lead to condemnation or the opposite - justification. Remember, Peter only denied Jesus through his words.
Eternal condemnation
Also, through words, a person can commit a sin that entails eternal condemnation, and will never be forgiven:
but whoever blasphemes the Holy Spirit, there will be no forgiveness forever, but he is subject to eternal condemnation. He said these things, because they said: "An unclean spirit is in him." (Mark 3: 29,30).
Note that sin that entails eternal condemnation is through words. The same follows from what was said in the Epistle to the Hebrews that some of the people to whom it speaks committed eternal sin, which could not be corrected by repentance (Heb. 6: 4-6):
For it is impossible - once enlightened, and having tasted the gift of heaven, and having become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and having tasted the good word of God and the powers of the future age, and fallen away, to renew again by repentance, when they again crucify the Son of God in themselves and swear at Him.
They could not return to God through repentance, because in this case they crucify the Son of God in themselves again and again and subject Him to public shame. A raging fire awaited them even though they had previously been sanctified with the blood of the covenant (Heb. 10: 26-29). There was no "eternal security" for them, just as there is none for any of us today.
Idolaters
Paul wrote to those who were already saved and knew that their spirits could be turned into an idolater by committing one single sin:
Do not be idolaters, like some of them, about whom it is written: “The people sat down to eat and drink, and stood up to play. "(1 Cor. 10: 7)
Paul speaks of the golden calf in Exodus 32. Therefore, even having done idolatry once, they became idolaters. And he knew that the same thing could happen to these Christians to whom he wrote. Remember, idolaters will fall into a lake burning with fire and brimstone, as the text of Rev. 21: 8.
Mark of the beast
Despite the clear warning about the mark of the "beast," many will accept it because of the heavy pressure. Saints who succumb to this compulsion will lose their salvation through a single act of disobedience:
And the third Angel followed them, saying with a loud voice: whoever worships the beast and his image and takes the mark on his forehead or on his hand, he will drink the wine of God's fury, whole wine, prepared in the cup of His anger, and will be tormented in fire. and sulfur before the holy angels and before the Lamb; and the smoke of their torment will ascend forever and ever, and those who worship the beast and his image and receive the mark of his name will have no rest day or night ... ”Here is the patience of the saints who keep the commandments of God and faith in Jesus. (Rev. 14: 9-12)
Devotion to Jesus for the rest of our lives is essential to salvation, even if it means severe persecution and physical death:
Do not be afraid of anything that you have to endure. Behold, the devil will cast some of you into prison to test you, and you will have tribulation for ten days. Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life. He who has an ear (to hear), let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches: he who overcomes will not suffer harm from the second death. (Rev. 2: 10,11)
Please don't be deceived
There are many ways for a Christian to lose his salvation. Sometimes only one act of sin can do this, while other times it does not happen as suddenly as, for example, when they become warm (Rev. 3:15, 16). Moreover, a person does not even need to sin in order to lose his salvation. He may lose it by believing in a false gospel (1 Cor. 15: 2; cf. 1 John 2: 24,25) or by preaching such a gospel (Gal. 1: 8,9). What a blow to all those who are deceived by those who have “turned grace into lasciviousness,” teaching that David never lost his salvation, or that one act of sin such as adultery, suicide, or drunkenness would not have the same consequences as deprivation salvation. Judas, however, identified all who turn grace into an excuse for debauchery as the wicked (Jude 3: 4), sowing strife, having no spirit (verse 19) and who are kept in darkness forever (verse 13).
False teachers who declare only sinful lifestyles to be spiritually dangerous not only ignore or distort the aforementioned verses, but also paint a dangerous picture of the possibility for an immoral, licentious, and immoral person to be a Christian at the same time. Consider again the text of 1 Cor. 6: 9,10 and above the list given there, and also look at the texts of Eph. 5: 5-7 and Rev. 21: 8.
According to false teachers preaching their unbiblical version of grace, if a previously saved person commits occasional acts of adultery, idolatry, sodomy, theft, covetousness, drunkenness, abuse, fraud, he remains saved. This is a terrible and spiritually dangerous distortion of the true Christian image as described in the Bible. Please note that the apostle Paul did not have to do a lot of research into Elim's lifestyle to find out that he was the son of the devil. (Acts 13: 6-10; cf. 1 John 3:10).
In addition, such a teacher, who declares only a way of life to be sinful, is not really a friend to immoral people. Rather, he exposes their souls to the danger of being attacked by Satan, misleading them with his false theory of "eternal security" and so-called grace or gospel. He shows no mercy or love, preaching his untruth and pleasing the same heretics as he is. A love and a vital message for them is the testimony that they must turn from such a sin to save their immortal souls, or be cursed along with Satan and his servants.
False shepherds claim that a righteous person who has become a villain can still go to heaven, yet Jesus made it crystal clear that the villains would instead go out into the resurrection of condemnation and be thrown into a fiery furnace:
And those who have done good will go forth into the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil into the resurrection of condemnation. (John 5:29)
The Son of Man will send His Angels, and they will gather from His Kingdom all the temptations and the perpetrators of iniquity, and cast them into the furnace of fire; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 13: 41,42)
Both paths are equally destructive
The distinction is between teachers of "eternal security" who blatantly allow a Christian to commit random acts of sin such as 1 Cor. 6: 9,10 and at the same time being saved, and those who say they reject the theory of "eternal security" but teach the same thing is irrelevant!
Indeed, there is no difference between them. With their notion that sin is not fatal, they lead people into the web of satanic delusion. If you are a true Christian, run away from such a congregation and from the so-called “pastor” no matter how convenient it may be to stay there. Do not jeopardize your eternal soul and the souls of those you love by attending and supporting such a ministry, a local church, or a hungry wolf in sheep's clothing. Do not share his wicked work (2 John 10:11).
Grace of god
Clearly, the early Christians could say who were believers and who were unbelievers:
Meanwhile, those who were scattered from the persecution that followed Stephen, went as far as Phenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, preaching the word to no one except the Jews. There were also some of them Cyprians and Cyrenees, who, having come to Antioch, spoke to the Greeks, preaching the gospel of the Lord Jesus. And the hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number believed and turned to the Lord. The rumor of this reached the Jerusalem church, and they instructed Barnabas to go to Antioch. When he arrived and saw the grace of God, he rejoiced and urged everyone to hold on to the Lord with a sincere heart. (Acts 11: 19-23).
Please note that when a person is saved, there is visible evidence that he or she possesses saving grace. It will logically follow true rebirth, since such a person, at the moment of his salvation, passes from death to life, from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to the power of God (John 5:24; Acts 26:18)!
Is it really possible that this kind of extraordinary transformation, right down to the very heart of the human person, goes unnoticed? Hardly! As in all of 1 John, the above passages declare that faithfully saved people can be found. This same truth is confirmed by many other Scriptures, in contrast to what the proponents of the theory of AOS teach, while wishing to be believed! To confuse this issue, they sometimes say that only God can see what is in the heart. God, of course, sees what is inaccessible to people, but many other Scriptures teach that a person can also distinguish a truly saved person from someone who is not, as has already been shown. In addition, there is more other evidence for this statement:
1. Epenetus was “the first beginning of Achaia for Christ” (Rom. 16: 5). The only way Paul could know about it was when there was visible evidence of his salvation in front of him. Evidently Paul knew who was being saved and who was not being saved by his preaching the gospel. The same can be said of the family of Stephen, who is also called the beginning of Achaia (1 Cor. 16:15).
2. Paul knew that Apelles was “tested” and established in Christ (Rom. 16:10). Again, Paul knew this man was in Christ.
3. Paul wrote to the saints in Rome: “Greet those of the household of Narcissus — those who are in the Lord” (Rom. 16:11). Clearly, Paul believed that people in the household of Narcissus who were in the Lord could be identified and distinguished from others in the same household who were not in the Lord. All saints should have this ability.
4. Paul wrote about Christian widows who can remarry, but only for a person who should belong to the Lord (1 Cor. 7:39). This implies that Christian widows have the ability to know who belongs to the Lord and who does not. Gal. 5:24 is one of the biblical criteria for this:But those who are Christ's crucified the flesh with passions and lusts.
5. Genuine "saints, especially from the house of Caesar" conveyed their greetings through the apostle Paul to the Philippian believers (Phil. 4:22). Of course, Paul was well aware that those who sent these greetings were "saints."
6. In the third chapter of his First Epistle to Timothy, Paul laid out spiritual guidelines for bishops and deacons so that Timothy could know who to appoint to these high church offices. In verse 6, Paul wrote the following:
He must not be a convert, so that he does not become proud and does not fall under the condemnation of the devil.
It is clear that Timothy could distinguish who was a convert. Thus, this text implies that Timothy could also know when a person is definitely being saved.
7. Paul wrote a commandment common to all Christians: “Do not be yoked with unbelievers” (2 Cor. 6:14). Christians here are obviously different from unbelievers.
8. Paul wrote that we should do good to all people, “and especially to our own by faith” (Galatians 6:10). This would not be possible if we could not distinguish between a real believer and an unbeliever.
9. Paul, writing to Christian slaves who have “faithful” masters that they should serve them even better because they are their brothers (1 Tim. 6: 2). This ability to distinguish one's spiritual family must clearly exist even in the Christian slave.
10. In fact, even the dark world can distinguish a true disciple of the Lord! Jesus taught:
By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another (John 13:35).
These are just a few of the many Scriptures that clearly refute those who say that a person who turns away from faith has never really been saved before. As has just been proven, the Bible teaches that there is visible evidence of salvation. Thus, we can clearly know whether a person was saved initially or not, despite the fact that this is categorically excluded in Calvinism:
God's decree on election, according to which people are chosen for salvation against their evil desires, is secret and therefore not known until the Judgment. (23)
Signs of Belonging to the Lord
In the life of any person who has been regenerated by the Spirit of God and cleansed by the Blood of the Lamb, there are certain signs or traits of identification. In addition to the apostle John's test criteria quoted above, we also have the following:
Persecution for a Godly Life:
Remember the word that I said to you: A servant is not greater than his master. If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my word, they will keep yours also (John 15:20).
And all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted (2 Tim. 3:12).
Concern over evil:
And he rescued the righteous Lot, weary of converting among people violently depraved, he delivered (for this righteous man, living among them, daily tormented in a righteous soul, seeing and hearing deeds of lawlessness) (2 Pet. 2: 7,8).
Shame for Past Sinful Life:
What fruit did you have then? Deeds which you yourself are now ashamed of, because their end is death (Rom. 6:21).
Good deeds and fruits of obedience:
He answered and said to them: My mother and my brothers are those who listen to the word of God and do it (Luke 8:21).
What is the use, my brethren, if someone says that he has faith but has no works? Can this faith save him? (James 2:14).
Commitment to the Christian Gospel:
But even if we or an Angel from heaven began to preach the gospel to you other than what we preached to you, let it be anathema. As we said before, so now I say again: whoever preaches the gospel to you other than what you have received, let him be anathema (Gal. 1: 8,9).
I remind you, brethren, the Gospel that I have preached to you, which you have accepted, in which you have been established, and by which you are saved, if you keep what was taught as I preached to you, unless you believe in vain. For I originally taught you that I myself received, that is, that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again on the third day, according to Scripture (1 Cor. 15: 1-4).
Separation from the world:
Why are they wondering that you do not participate with them in the same debauchery, and they curse you (1 Pet. 4: 4).
And therefore come out from among them and separate yourself, says the Lord, and do not touch the unclean one; and I will receive you. And I will be a Father to you, and you will be My sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty (2 Cor. 6: 17,18).
Freedom from sinful addiction:
“… And the truth will set you free. They answered him: we are the seed of Abraham and have never been slaves to anyone; how do you say: be made free? Jesus answered them: Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. But a slave does not dwell in the house forever; the son abides forever. So, if the Son sets you free, you will truly be free ”(John 8: 32-36).
Do you not know that to whom you give yourself up as slaves for obedience, you are also slaves to whom you obey, or slaves of sin to death, or obedience to righteousness? Thanks be to God that you, being previously slaves to sin, have become obedient from your heart to the way of teaching that you have given yourself up to. Having been freed from sin, you have become slaves to righteousness (Rom. 6: 16-18).
Note: Nowhere in the Bible is it stated that prophesying, performing miracles, or casting out demons in the name of Jesus, which is listed in Matt. 7: 21-23 are evidence of the saving faith quoted in Acts. 11:23. In addition, going to “church,” distributing saving literature, and even preaching are not such witnesses either.
The parable of the sower
In the Parable of the Sower, the Lord mentions four types of people who hear the Word of God. At the same time, it is argued that only the first type of people will never be saved! Besides the clear statement about this in Luke. 8:12, we see that no other plant fell from the seed (the Word of God), unlike all the other three types that became saved at least for a while (Luke 8: 5-8). Those people who are described in Lk. 8:12, never really been saved.
(NOTE: However, MacArthur and preachers like him deliberately do not use this verse to support their never-saved theory because of the next verse, Luke 8:13, which clearly refutes the AOS theory. in verse 13 people had an experience of true salvation, since it clearly speaks of how a particular plant sprouted and had life for some time, and then died due to persecution for truth, cf. Mark 4: 16,17.)
However, the second group definitely had salvation for a while, because Jesus said they believed for a while! Of course, this type of person does not fit the definition of the AOS theorists, who claim that the fallen have never had real salvation before. If you think carefully about the content of both of these verses, then their mistake will become obvious:
And what fell on the way is the essence of hearers, to whom the devil then comes and takes the word out of their hearts, so that they may not believe and be saved. And those who fell on the stone are those who, when they hear the word, accept with joy, but who do not have a root, and believe in time, but fall away during temptation. (Luke 8: 12,13).
The Apostle Paul also certainly could not have been a POSN teacher like John MacArthur. Thus, he did not think that his co-workers Hymenaeus and Alexander had never been saved before, because their faith in Jesus was shipwrecked, i.e. turned out to be only temporary, as some representatives of the AOS theory would say today:
Having faith and a good conscience, which some rejected, they were shipwrecked in faith. Such are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I gave to Satan so that they would learn not to blaspheme. (1 Tim. 1: 19,20).
Paul knew that the same terrible tragedy that happened to Hymenaeus and Alexander could also happen to Timothy, who was definitely saved. Therefore, he told him how he can avoid this fate.
How narrow is the path to life?
John MacArthur would agree that the path to life is hard (Matt "Sin to death." In their opinion, it means that God puts to death an unrepentant Christian who may be in adultery or other similar sin, and rewards him by raptured by a faster way to heaven! James Kennedy, who is as much a Calvinist as John MacArthur, wrote about this quite definitely:
The sins of a child of God can cause his premature death in this world…. I remember one person in this church who, many years ago, was in the sin of adultery. He was a minister and left his ministry, but he seemed to be a godly man and a Christian. Only God knew his heart. He was married, but was about to divorce his wife and marry another woman. I warned him and urged him to repent until he was brought before the church council, which also warned him to repent. However, he did not repent and was temporarily suspended from Communion. Finally, the membership meeting decided that because he remained unconvinced, he should be expelled from the church. Just before this happened, God intervened in such a way that suddenly this young man died. These are just a few of the countless and unlimited ways in which God can punish those who are His property but do not repent of their sins. (24)
This is the teaching of a man who is the senior pastor of the Fort Lauderdale, Florida Presbyterian Church, which has approximately 10,000 members. Kennedy has also written over 45 books with his bestselling book Evangelism Explosion, which has sold more than 1.5 million copies. His voiced teaching is listened to through radio and television throughout America and other parts of the world, including the former Soviet Union and the Middle East. He also founded a radio station, Conx Theological Seminary and a fully accredited K-12 academy with more than 1,250 students. Its influence is incredibly great, and yet it spreads spiritual poison!
These perverters of the doctrine of grace, including Kennedy, are at odds with what they call never-before-saved. For some unknown reason, they blame "temporary faith" on a person who once had compelling evidence of their salvation, and then contradict this view by claiming that others who died suddenly physically in unrepentant sin such as adultery or drunkenness were saved, and that it was God who subjected them to death, taking them to a better place - to Heaven! This teaching of theirs is nothing more than a contradiction, a flagrant violation of the evangelical norms of holiness and the granting of a license to immorality.
Don't doubt it!
According to the AOS theory and Calvinist theology, an unrepentant unfaithful spouse remains saved even though he died physically in such a spiritual state. Since God could not bring him to repentance through His discipline, He put him to death. Remember, death is beneficial for the Christian to whom these preachers attribute it! Therefore, such an interpretation of the concept of sin to death clearly provides the sinning Christian with a license to commit sin so that he can live after his flesh is removed from this cursed land, remaining unrepentant and accepted more quickly into the blessed Kingdom of God! What an incredible license to immorality is this teaching of "perseverance of the saints," "eternal security," or "once saved, saved forever."
Stay holy?
It also removes the curtain from the POSN version of Calvinism forever, as if it could be compatible with a holy life. This interpretation of the Gospel expression "sin to death" substitutes for holiness its exact opposite. Why, then, are these people guilty of adultery and others like them who remain unrepentant are not considered to be never saved from the beginning like others? Again, why is salvation denied only to some of those who sin in this way, but not to all?
Since the proponents of the AOSN theory refuse to understand “sin to death” as a name for spiritual death, which would contradict this theory, they trap themselves into this dilemma, that is, the possibility of remaining an unrepentant unfaithful spouse until physical death and nevertheless still be saved in the end. Obviously for the preachers of the SOSN, it remained hidden that God, physically killing those people whom He once freed from Egypt because of their sins, in fact sent them straight to hell, since in this way He performed His final judgment on them ( see Numbers 16: 26-34).
They refuse to admit this because it is to their advantage to perpetuate the teachings of the SOSN and their own ecclesiastical offices. But, notice what the Bible says:
I want to remind you, who already know this, that the Lord, having delivered the people from the land of Egypt, then destroyed those who did not believe, and the angels, who did not retain their dignity, but left their dwelling, keeps them in eternal bonds, under darkness, at the judgment of the great day. How Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, like them who committed fornication and walked after other flesh, having been subjected to the punishment of eternal fire, are set as an example (Jude 5-7).
God will bring them back if they really are His people
Their teaching is marked by multiple contradictions and shortcomings. Note another contradiction that Kennedy described:
This is the teaching about the perseverance of the saints…. "[They] may fall away partially or completely ... Which means that they may fall away partially or temporarily, but God will return them to Himself if they are really His people (25)
Christian adulterers?
God never returned to Himself the unrepentant adulterer from the story of Kennedy, who was also a minister, allegedly marking him as His property. This doctrine, which completely destroys the holy Christian lifestyle, allows one to be considered saved forever who can behave in a sinful way, just like the carnal Christian of Charles Stanley. Thus, these blind guides implicitly admit that God's punishment does not always work in the matter of returning a backslidden person to God. This is the same truth that Christians have long asserted, professing the conditional safety of the believer (Jer. 32:33; etc.).
The dual language of the Calvinists
It also confirms their misleading teachings in a subtle way. Kennedy continues to write his hideous thoughts:
We persist in pursuing godliness and a holy life in ministry for Jesus Christ, but we will only complete this in His eternal kingdom. (26)
Kennedy speaks here in a ramified and evasive language that is characteristic of the Indians. He had just taught that an unrepentant unfaithful spouse was delivered by God to death and introduced into the kingdom of God. Naturally, this man did not at all persist in pursuing piety and a holy life in the ministry for Jesus Christ.
Facade of MacArthur Holiness
The Calvinist doctrine of the saving faith of MacArthur-Kennedy is nothing more than a license to debauchery, hidden under the guise of outward piety. Just like Kennedy's case, please read the following words by JOHN MCARTUR carefully so that you can then see the real message behind his outer façade, which has seduced a large number of people over the years:
The slaves of sin — unbelievers — are set free from righteousness (Rom. 6:20). Christians, on the other hand, are free from sin and slaves to God through faith in Jesus Christ (verse 22). The inevitable fruit of this is sanctification, and the ultimate result is eternal life (verse 22). This promise sums up everything that Romans chapter 6 says: God frees us not only from the punishment of sin (justification), but also from the dominion of sin (sanctification). (27)
A sincerely saved and obedient follower of the Lord Jesus will experience divine truth and freedom from sin (verse 34). (28)
Christians enslaved by sin?
Obviously, a teaching such as the one above has given rise to anxiety in the minds of some of his followers, so John MacArthur makes the reservation that this is only a sinful habit. Those. it switches from this position to another,
revealing a license to debauchery, which he had already condemned earlier, which makes his teaching internally contradictory. Note what he wrote about people he thinks are Christians:
Some Christians question their salvation because they probably cannot overcome a sinful or unreasonable habit. They most often report smoking, overeating and masturbation ... They find their struggle with these sinful habits hopeless. But John does not say that the frequent manifestation of one specific sin in a person's life means that he is lost for eternity. Rather, he clarifies his understanding of the matter by saying that a true believer cannot do “iniquity” (1 John 3: 4). The Greek term anomia used here literally means to live as if there were no law. A person who rejects God's authority does not care what God thinks about his habits and is clearly not a Christian. (29)
MacArthur's Hidden Definition of Christian
John MacArthur teaches that the frequent manifestation of one specific sin does not imply that such a person is lost, even if such a person cannot withdraw and be freed from sexual inclination to sin such as masturbation. According to him, one way or another, but all this does not imply that they are doing lawlessness. To do this, they would have to not care what God thinks about their [evil] habits that captivate them! John MacArthur apparently got this explanation out of his own head and does not even try to justify such a strange assertion with the help of contradicting scriptures that he quotes on other occasions. He did not at all cite any support for this opinion.
Thus, according to John MacArthur, as long as you care what God thinks about your own evil and sinful habits, from which you cannot free yourself in any way and therefore often become their victim, you are saved and should not doubt your salvation, even if you are a slave to sexual sin! This is part of his true definition of a true Christian, which John MacArthur rarely reveals but likes to keep hidden for special occasions. This explains why he also believes that the unnamed sexual lecher in 1 Cor. 5, who committed "such a fornication as is not heard even among the Gentiles" (1 Cor. 5: 1), was a real Christian. It is for this reason that John MacArthur is convinced that a true believer can commit the sins that King David did during his darkest time known to us:True believers sometimes commit heinous sins, as David did in 2 Samuel. 11. (30)
John MacArthur's saving faith declares that such was still a genuine believer. Since this cannot contradict the theory of SOSN, David did not lose his salvation by sinning in the case of Bathsheba. Therefore, nothing prevented MacArthur from writing on the same page as the above quote, the following: In other words, all true believers follow Jesus (John 10: 27-28). (31)
King David Still Followed Jesus
Thus, one way or another, but a true believer can sin like King David, and at the same time remain a follower of Jesus Christ. He can follow Jesus and be saved, even remaining in his unrepentant sins of adultery, murder, etc. The same can be said for those Christians who are filled with agonizing doubts about their salvation because they probably cannot overcome their sinful or unreasonable habit [in particular masturbation]. MacArthur continues and writes more about true believers:
Those with true faith will fail - and in some cases even often - but remain a true believer as they acknowledge sin as a way of life and look to the Father for forgiveness (1 John 1: 9). (32)
Another controversy
A saved person who has lost his way does not always confess his sins and turn to the Father for forgiveness, because he has his own understanding of "sin to death", which is taught by MacArthur, Kennedy and other Calvinists. About this John MacArthur writes the following:
Sin ... can even endanger our physical life and health (1 Cor. 11: 29-30). (33)
Although sin does not end in spiritual death for the believer, it can lead to physical death (1 Cor. 11:30; 1 John 5:16). (34)
Refusing to repent and forsake sin can ultimately lead to physical death as God's judgment (Acts 5: 1-11; 1 Cor. 5: 5; 11:30). (35)
Thus, since God puts to death an unrepentant Christian who continues to sin, the latter definitely cannot confess his sins and turn to the Father for forgiveness, although John MacArthur teaches that a true believer will do this! If they fell away, they were never saved!
Sometimes one has to wonder if John MacArthur is a split personality because of his teaching methods. If God can save a sinning Christian by giving him up to physical death, then this must somehow reasonably be reconciled with the following quotes from MacArthur:
Those who fall away from Christ prove that they have never been truly believers before (1 John 2:19). (36)
The departure of people from the truth and their departure from the church is their exposure. (37)
Less than complete or final apostasy
John MacArthur adds to this by commenting on Matt. 26:31, in which the Bible attributes the apostles to the apostles, the following words:
The Greek word translated “be offended” is the same that Jesus uses at 24:10 to describe the falling away and spiritual betrayal that will occur in the last days. However, here Jesus is talking about something less than complete or final apostasy. (38)
Thus, according to the teachings of John MacArthur, a true Christian can fall away and still remain saved as long as it is less than total or final apostasy. Applied to the apostles, this would mean that they did not lose their salvation, even by rejecting Jesus, for example, in the case of Peter, who did this three times!
Referring to John MacArthur's commentary in his Study Bible on Matt. 10:33, you can see a link to another of his notes. In the text of Matt. 10:33 contains a warning from Jesus about the possibility of apostasy threatening the same group of people who later denied Jesus in Matt. 26: 31.56:
And whoever denies Me before people, I will also deny before My Father in Heaven.
The Spiritual Denial of the Apostle Peter
As just mentioned, John MacArthur directs the reader to his footnote to Luke. 12: 9, where he writes in a disgusting manner:
This text describes a spiritual denial of Christ. It was Peter's temporary hesitation for which he was guilty ... (39)
In fact, this verse says what the apostle Paul says elsewhere:
And whoever rejects Me before men will be rejected before the Angels of God (Luke 12: 9).
If we endure, then we will reign with Him; if we deny, He will also deny us (2 Tim. 2:12).
The Greek word used in Luke 12: 9, 2 Tim. 2:12 (like the text of Matthew 10:33) is arneomai, which means:
To contradict, that is, to deny, reject, deny, refuse. (40)
This same word can be found in the following Scriptures, which show that the apostle Peter committed this very great sin, which, according to John MacArthur, was merely a spiritual renunciation:
But he denied it before everyone, saying: I do not know what you are saying (Matt. 26:70).
And he again denied with an oath that he did not know this Man (Matt. 26:72).
But he denied, saying: I don’t know and don’t understand what you are saying. And he went out into the front yard (Mark 14:68).
He denied again. A little later, those who were standing here again began to say to Peter: as if you are one of them; for you are a Galilean (Mark 14:70).
But he [Peter] denied Him [Jesus], saying to the woman: I do not know Him (Luke 22:57).
Simon Peter stood and warmed himself. Then they said to him: Are you not also one of his disciples? He denied and said no (John 18:25).
Peter denied again; and immediately the cock crowed (John 18:27).
How could John MacArthur have missed these facts? He claims to have studied the Scriptures for an impressive thirty years, thirty hours a week. And he considers all these texts to be evidence of Peter's "temporal hesitation", which he expressed in his footnote to the text of Luke. 12: 9:
Temporary hesitation?
Notice the part of MacArthur's expression where he says that Peter was only guilty of temporary hesitation, so that he denied only in soul, when in reality it was not. Why? No doubt he followed his favorite theory of "saved once, saved forever." Notice also how MacArthur tries to play down Peter's deadly denial by calling it temporary hesitation.
Why does he consider this a temporary hesitation when Jesus called him renunciation? This denial means that the results of a person's denial of Jesus and Jesus' denial of a person must be appropriate. All of this must mean that the true denial that Jesus spoke of was applicable to the apostles. However, John MacArthur wants all of us to believe the exact opposite of this truth. Contrary to the true meaning of this concept in Scripture, John MacArthur clearly shows the same dedication to his desire to defend the doctrine of "saved once, saved forever."
The truth is that the Apostle Peter remained in his denial of the Lord and lost his salvation until he repented and thus brought it back. Moreover, Peter did so without committing the sin "of habit" or as a "lifestyle," as John MacArthur insists elsewhere! Rather than violating this biblical truth, it is much safer for our spiritual life to accept it and walk in the light of it and other associated, eternal facts that suggest that a true Christian might lose his salvation, and this can happen. fast enough, as shown above.
What does complete or final apostasy mean?
As with Kennedy, John MacArthur's view of sin leading to death contradicts what he teaches elsewhere. Of course, those people who committed the sin to death were also guilty of complete and final apostasy, although they were subsequently introduced into the Kingdom of God because of their repentance. Consequently, they fell away from God to an extreme degree, and not only temporarily, in order, in spite of everything, to remain Christians, according to the teachings of the SOSN.
Faith and Holiness According to the Teachings of MacArthur
Therefore, the sum of all the above evidence leads us to conclude that the teachings of John MacArthur (as well as Kennedy and all other preachers of the theory of AOS) are filled with unbiblical statements and internal contradictions that are not only wrong, but much worse - deadly. John MacArthur denies the basic truth that sin can lead God's true people to spiritual death, which he admits happened to Adam and Eve. (41) His often-hidden identification of a true believer was clothed by him in a false robe of holiness (which Kennedy did as well). As a result, a large number of sincere Christians have been deceived into thinking that he and his ministry are right.
Never forget that John MacArthur and many other Calvinists are nothing more than teachers of AOS theory and nothing else. For this reason, they are unable to teach the true biblical message of holiness that they claim, for their understanding of saving faith will never allow it. Therefore, they try to manipulate a certain part of Scripture and avoid others in order to force it to agree with what it actually denies.
True saving faith
What kind of saving faith must be required to truly enter the Kingdom of God? It must be a faith in Jesus Christ that includes repentance as an expression of aversion to sin. More precisely, genuine faith in Jesus Christ obeys Him for the purpose of fulfilling His Word in a renewed and holy life. Moreover, this same faith, which brings instant salvation, can subsequently be destroyed by false teaching (2 Tim. 2:18), shipwrecked (1 Tim. 1: 19,20), cease to exist (Luke 8:13) and etc., despite the fact that earlier it brought man eternal life and deliverance from sins. Therefore, the true Christian must remain awake in his personal responsibility to possess eternal salvation, because he is still in danger of going to hell, like so many who have already had salvation once.
A sin committed after salvation continues to be poisonous for a Christian, so it may well cause him spiritual death in the future, i.e. deprive him of salvation, according to the true doctrine of grace (Rom. 8:13; cf. p. Luke 15: 24,32; James 1: 14,15; Gal. 5: 19-21; 6: 8,9) ... He can't bring him anything good, no matter how much John MacArthur wants us to believe it. It is quite possible to cleanse your heart by faith in Jesus Christ (Acts 15: 9; cf. 1 Tim. 1: 5,6), but later to be defiled by sin again and return to the old sinful life (2 Pet. 2: 20-22 ). [For a long list of possible spiritual tragedies see our book, Conditional Safety of the Believer, p. 632]. To share eternity with Christ and enter the Kingdom of God, a Christian must endure in faith and repentance until the end of his life (Heb. 3:14; Matt. 10:22; Rev. 2: 10,11). There is no compulsion in life with God regarding salvation.
Do not be deceived by John MacArthur or any other teacher (including your shepherd) who dares to speak against this belief that even the occasional act of adultery or drunkenness in a Christian's life cannot rob them of salvation. In this matter, your immortal souls are under serious threat.
Delusion of teachers of "eternal security" is proven
The following definition, based on the teachings of eternal security preachers such as John MacArthur and D. James Kennedy, is no exception:
The popular teachers of the theory of "eternal security" today avoid one part of Scripture and distort another with the criminal purpose of deceiving overly gullible people into the fact that sinful behavior in a Christian's life, no matter how serious it is, cannot exclude him from the Kingdom God's because he was once saved.
Such prowling wolves in sheep's clothing mislead many people, directing them to hell, while they themselves often become financially successful, promising their listeners false salvation in the presence of their sins such as those given in 1 Cor. 6: 9,10, hidden under the guise of their distorted version of the grace and limitless merit of Christ. This grace is clearly described in the book of Jude (Jude 3: 4) as an excuse for debauchery and for this reason should be rejected by Christians for the salvation of their immortal souls.
Notes (edit)
(1) For information on how to obtain a copy of our book, The Conditional Safety of the Believer, please visit http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/whatsnew.htm ", Publishing house" Title-Verlag "(Germany), 2003.
(2) See our brochure entitled The Gospel According to Charles Stanley, available through Evangelical Outreach, PO Box 265, Washington, PA 15301.
(3) Many do not understand that John MacArthur, just as Ryrie and Hodge teach, believes that salvation can continue without repentance cursing the sinful soul and after receiving rebirth. Their main difference is the need to repent in order to be born again, but as to what happens to the believer after that, there is no difference between Ryrie, Hodge and John MacArthur, who assert the possibility of maintaining a state of salvation in the presence of "accidental" actions of the unrepentant sins such as adultery, murder, etc. By the way, they all teach this like the David-Bathsheba-Uriah scene in 1 Cor. 5: 1-5, Peter's threefold denial, etc.
(4) MacArthur Study Bible ((Publication of the Word, 1997), p. 1969, comments on 1 John 3: 8.
(5) John MacArthur, Jr., God: Standing Face to Face with His Greatness (Winner's Books, 1993), pages 47.48.
(6) Ibid., P. 48.
(7) Ibid.
(8) Ibid., P. 119
(9) MacArthur Study Bible (Word Publication, 1997), p. 1927, comments on James 1:15.
(10) John MacArthur, Jr., God: Staying Face To Face With His Greatness, p. 118.
(11) Ibid., P. 119, italics.
(12) Ibid., P. 119.
(13) MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1706, comments on Rom. 8: 1.
(14) Ibid, p. 1708, comments on Rom. 8:28.
(15) Ibid, p. 1709, comments on Rom. 8:34 am.
(16) Ibid., P. 1736, comments on 1 Cor. 6:11. At least twenty-six times in the New Testament, we meet people, named or unnamed, who walked away from the truth, were shipwrecked in faith, fell away, etc. However, none of the early Christians said of such people that they were never saved from the beginning! In addition, MacArthur quotes Jn. 10: 28,29 as an argument in support of the theory of "eternal security". Consequently, he teaches the doctrine of “security in a state of sin,” referring to the people he describes in 1 Cor. 6:11, as Christians saved according to the theory of "eternal security" based on John. 10: 28.29. And this is all, despite the fact that they are in such sins, which are quoted in the text of 1 Cor. 6: 9.10.
(17) Ibid., P. 1736, comments on 1 Cor. 6: 9.
(18) Ibid., P. 1811, comments on Eph. 5: 5.
(19) John F. MacArthur, Jr., The Difficulty of Faith: The Great Cost of Following Jesus (Word Publication, 1993), p. 128.
(20) MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1798, commented on Gal. 5:21.
(21) Ibid., P. 1736.
(22) Ibid., P. 1736.
(23) New Geneva Study Bible (Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995), p. 1784. It is impossible to have any assurance of salvation according to this type of teaching. This and other AFS editions of the Study Bible should be avoided in every possible way.
(24) D. James Kennedy, Can Punishment of a Christian Come from God's Favor, pp. 14,15 pamphlet (emphasis added).
(25) D. James Kennedy, The Perseverance of the Saints, p. 5, pamphlet (parentheses in original).
(26) D. James Kennedy, Can Punishment of a Christian Come from God's Favor, p. 10.
(27) MacArthur, The Difficulty of Faith, p. 121.
(28) MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1599, comments on John 8:32.
(29) John MacArthur, Jr., Saved Without Doubt (Victor's Books, 1992), pp. 77,78.
(30) MacArthur, The Difficulty of Faith, p. 24.
(31) Ibid, p. 24.
(32) Ibid., P. 31.
(33) Ibid, p. 134.
(34) MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1927, commented by James. 1:15.
(35) Ibid., P. 1974, comments on 1 Jn. 5: 16.17. Note: John MacArthur, like John Calvin, believes in the salvation of the sexually immoral man (male) of 1 Cor. 5, who was saved like the others listed in 1 Cor. 11:30 and Acts. 5: 1-11. Why doesn't he say that the man from 1 Cor. 5 was never saved from the beginning because of his ongoing sexual sin? In addition, John MacArthur says that the judgment of this unnamed sexually immoral man from 1 Cor. 5: 5 consisted of physical death. However, analyzing the text of 2 Cor. 2: 6,7, he declares that this man was still physically alive after this judgment because, due to his repentance, it was time to restore him. John MacArthur, like other Calvinists, has a conflicting theology.
(36) Ibid, p. 1439, Mt. 24:13. Please remember that the false teachers (antichrists and false apostles) who left the apostle John in 1 Jn. 2:19, never showed any evidence to support their salvation, conversion, or redemption, since they clearly denied that Jesus was the Christ (1 John 2:22). Therefore, citing this verse as a confirmation of the AOSN theory that an apostate was never really saved from the beginning is a gross abuse of Scripture, or rather, a disregard for the opposite Bible evidence that other apostates had a true experience of salvation along with all of it. signs, however, they once abandoned it until their own spiritual death (see 1 Tim. 1: 5,6; 1 Tim. 1: 19,20; Heb. 10: 26-29, etc.).
(37) Ibid., P. 1967, comments on 1 Jn. 2:19.
(38) Ibid, p. 1445, comments on Matt. 26:31.
(39) Ibid., P. 1538, comments on Luke. 12: 9.
(40) Strong's Symphony, Greek Dictionary, No. 720.
(41) MacArthur Study Bible, pages 19 and 20, comments on Gen. 2:17; 3: 4.5.
New rules for personal property tax
Features of the sale of an apartment with illegal redevelopment
Rules and procedure for the exam