Why John MacArthur became a Calvinist.

[FSSL]

The Free Grace Movement was characterized by Ryrie and Zane Hodges. They taught at Grace Theological Seminary in Winona Lake IN. I was indoctrinated in this at Maranatha Baptist Bible College in 1992-95.

Small correction: they taught at Dallas

Did you have a professor at MBBC that taught this?

 

[Ekklesian]

I know people who claim to be saved because they “believe in Jesus” but live double lives. Some people who claim the name of Christ can lie with impunity, promote and defend every kind of sin imaginable and yet believe they will stand justified before God because of their “faith.”

Really? You know such people? You're hangin' with wrong crowd.

“The devils also believe and tremble” (James 2:19).

Yeah, but that's not faith. The devils see God. The devils see the eternal realm. The devils see the sons of God. Faith is the evidence of things NOT seen.

James is writing to those who have become proud, and respecters of persons, and vain in their imaginations. They imagine they believe in God, but he shows them their belief is really unbelief, because they don't tremble at the law they'd spurned. The devils have better knowledge than they do, and do better.

For those such as James is writing to, it is right to direct their focus to themselves, and to see themselves in the light of God's law, that they may despair of themselves and flee to Christ.

It is quite the carnal notion to think that James is saying one's works completes his faith, or that he can have assurance of faith by looking at his works. It's quite the poisonous weed to Christ's despairing sheep.

We're told of a host of people who draw their assurance from their works, and who will be quite astonished on the day of judgment.

Lord, Lord. Have we not prophesied in thy name, and in thy name have cast out devils, and in thy name have done many wonderful works?​

​

I never knew you. Depart from me ye workers of iniquity. For when I was destitute and afflicted and persecuted, you didn't minister unto me.​

​

When did we ever see you thus, and not minister unto you?​

​

When you didn't minister to the least of my brothers, you didn't minister to me.​

​

And Christ will turn to another host.

Come, ye blessed of my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. When I was destitute and afflicted and persecuted, you ministered to me. ​

​

When did we ever see you thus, and minister to you?​

​

When you ministered to the least of my brothers, you ministered to me.​

​

The great contrast here between the two hosts, is that one will have an eye toward their works, and the other will not, even though the other's works are true.

Likewise, Paul's confidence-slash-assurance, was not in an eye toward his obedience, but faith in the promises of God. For I know Whom I have believed, and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I've committed unto Him against that day.

How is your view of assurance any different than that of Yankee Arnold or Bob Gray or any other so-called preacher of the gospel who believes in faith without repentance?

I don't know anything about the teaching of the people you've mentioned. There was a short discussion about faith and repentance here.

Basically you present repentance as condition of salvation, and I present repentance as a result of it.

If there has been no change in one’s heart only a self-deceived person can have any assurance of salvation. That person needs to examine himself as to whether he is in the faith just as the apostle Paul warned. “God grants repentance unto life” (Acts 11:18).

I will go further, if one does not have a new heart, a work of grace has not been performed in him. That doesn't mean that sin is not present with him. And as I said in another post that has managed to escape your notice in this thread:

The ones who generally worry about it are those who do believe. They tend to be hyper-concious of their sin. They've looked into the mirror of the law, and they abhor themselves. They agonize and mourn over their sin.

Blessed are they who mourn, for they shall be comforted.

They cry out, O wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death? They must look in faith to the finished work of Christ. Looking to their own works leads only to despair.

And yet you believe that a Christian's obedience to Christ has nothing to do with assurance when it comes to whether they are truly saved?

Absolutely.

 

[biscuit1953]

Really? You know such people? You're hangin' with wrong crowd.

biscuit1953 said:
“The devils also believe and tremble” (James 2:19).

Yeah, but that's not faith. The devils see God. The devils see the eternal realm. The devils see the sons of God. Faith is the evidence of things NOT seen. James clearly is talking about a faith that doesn't save. A dead faith that doesn't affect our actions. James 2:14 talks about a faith that is all talk and no actions and asks the question, "Can faith (that doesn't result in change) save him?" The answer is obviously no.

James is writing to those who have become proud, and respecters of persons, and vain in their imaginations. They imagine they believe in God, but he shows them their belief is really unbelief, because they don't tremble at the law they'd spurned. The devils have better knowledge than they do, and do better.

For those such as James is writing to, it is right to direct their focus to themselves, and to see themselves in the light of God's law, that they may despair of themselves and flee to Christ.

It is quite the carnal notion to think that James is saying one's works completes his faith, or that he can have assurance of faith by looking at his works. It's quite the poisonous weed to Christ's despairing sheep.

We're told of a host of people who draw their assurance from their works, and who will be quite astonished on the day of judgment.

Lord, Lord. Have we not prophesied in thy name, and in thy name have cast out devils, and in thy name have done many wonderful works?​

​

I never knew you. Depart from me ye workers of iniquity. For when I was destitute and afflicted and persecuted, you didn't minister unto me.​

​

When did we ever see you thus, and not minister unto you?​

​

When you didn't minister to the least of my brothers, you didn't minister to me.​

​

And Christ will turn to another host.

Come, ye blessed of my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. When I was destitute and afflicted and persecuted, you ministered to me. ​

​

When did we ever see you thus, and minister to you?​

​

When you ministered to the least of my brothers, you ministered to me.​

​

The great contrast here between the two hosts, is that one will have an eye toward their works, and the other will not, even though the other's works are true.

Likewise, Paul's confidence-slash-assurance, was not in an eye toward his obedience, but faith in the promises of God. For I know Whom I have believed, and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I've committed unto Him against that day.

biscuit1953 said:
How is your view of assurance any different than that of Yankee Arnold or Bob Gray or any other so-called preacher of the gospel who believes in faith without repentance?

I don't know anything about the teaching of the people you've mentioned. There was a short discussion about faith and repentance here.

Basically you present repentance as condition of salvation, and I present repentance as a result of it. Mark 1:4 "John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins." They wern't baptized in order to repent but because they had repented as in Acts 2:38. Baptism did not produce repentance but was a result (cf. Matt 3:7-8). Repentance involves turning from sin to God (cf. 1 Thess 1:9; Heb 12:14-17). The apostle Paul told Jews and Gentiles to repent and turn to God and do works fitting for repentance (Acts 26:20). Genuine repentance is a work of God in the human heart (Acts 11:18). Yankee Arnold is preaching a damnable doctrine by giving false assurances to those who believe they can come to God on their own terms. The apostle John makes it crystal clear that those who continue in sin as a lifestyle have deceived themselves (1 John 3).


I will go further, if one does not have a new heart, a work of grace has not been performed in him. That doesn't mean that sin is not present with him. And as I said in another post that has managed to escape your notice in this thread:


biscuit1953 said:
And yet you believe that a Christian's obedience to Christ has nothing to do with assurance when it comes to whether they are truly saved?

Absolutely. According to the apostle John those who believe that are deceived.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Yes, of course God is the first mover, and in that sense I agree with your usage of "instigator". His first movement doesn't necessitate irresistibility though. The use of helkuo in Jn 6:44, and it's equivalent usage in Jn 12:32 where "all people" are drawn allow for a universal call.

That argument aside, how do you answer the Acts 17 text regarding some sense of people "seeking" God?

John 12:32: the context of that verse goes back to v.20 where some Greeks came and asked to see Jesus. I believe the verse means that after He is lifted up on the cross, He will draw all men….Jews and Gentiles to the message of the gospel as opposed to ‘only the lost sheep of the house of Israel’.

In John 6, after Jesus said ‘no man can come to me except the Father draw him’, He goes on to say “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them. From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him”. I believe those who no longer followed Him were attracted to Him but were not enabled to trust in Him.

I think Ransom addressed the Acts 17 passage.

 

[abcaines]

The Free Grace Movement was characterized by Ryrie and Zane Hodges. They taught at Grace Theological Seminary in Winona Lake IN. I was indoctrinated in this at Maranatha Baptist Bible College in 1992-95.

Basically, it says that if you confess Jesus with your mouth, NOTHING ELSE EVER HAS TO HAPPEN. You never have to have any evidence at all. Later at Central Baptist Seminary Charles Hauser, who studied under them took it farther. He said, in class, that Romans 10:9 "because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord" meant that if you simply agreed that Jesus is "DEITY" you are saved. No change is necessary. You can live like whatever.

In response to that movement, John MacArthur wrote "The Gospel According to Jesus," that is basically a straight Reformed view of Salvation and sanctification. The same faith that saves is the faith that sanctifies. Without a changed life, you are not a believer.

It was a hot topic in the 90's. I read MacArthur and was convinced. His book was clear and simple.

IFBs had a major split with MacArthur in the 80s over this. My (assistant) pastor at the time recommend The Masters College to me. One of the deacons in the church told me not to buy into "that lordship salvation stuff". I had never heard of the issue. I asked the senior pastor, a BJU grad from the 50s, what all this lordship salvation stuff was about and he asked me if I was saved. I said I was then he asked if Jesus is my Lord and I said He is. He said, "there you go!"

I was grateful for such a simple counsel on the issue because I had learned in all of my time with IFB that if you are saved, your life WILL show it. Going to TMC during the spring of 1988 taught me how to articulate what I had been taught over the previous four years.

 

[ALAYMAN]

The particle αρα translated "haply" presumes a negative answer. So the implication is that they seek, but do not find. I could paraphrase Paul's meaning along the lines of, "God has placed men where they are, so that they will seek him, but do they find him? No, they feel around like blind men in the dark, but they don't find God even though he's right there."

These Greek were "seekers", as their pantheon suggests. Paul's rhetoric to them seemed to give them more light it would lead them to a proper focus of their misguided faith.

 

[Ransom]

These Greek were "seekers", as their pantheon suggests. Paul's rhetoric to them seemed to give them more light it would lead them to a proper focus of their misguided faith.

Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. (1 Cor. 1:22-24)​

What Paul proclaimed to the Athenians was not the worldly wisdom that they were seeking. When he called them religious, it was not a compliment. Their religiosity was misguided, so he proclaimed what they were not seeking after.

They scoffed at the idea of bodily resurrection and called Paul a "seed-picker": that is, a babbler, dilettante, someone who picks up scraps of knowledge without understanding (Acts 17:18). They thought themselves too sophisticated for this amateur philosopher from out of town.

 

[Bob Jones VI]

Small correction: they taught at Dallas

Did you have a professor at MBBC that taught this?

My correction. It was Dr. Charles Hauser at Central Baptist Seminary in Minneapolis who studied at Grace Theological Seminary.

Yes, It was in Dispensationalism class. I can't remember which prof. It was one of the Profs they brought in from Detroit for Module classes.

 

[FSSL]

My correction. It was Dr. Charles Hauser at Central Baptist Seminary in Minneapolis who studied at Grace Theological Seminary.

Yes, It was in Dispensationalism class. I can't remember which prof. It was one of the Profs they brought in from Detroit for Module classes.

no profs at Detroit taught Free Grace... unless they were giving all of the problems.