CharismaNews: John MacArthur, Strange Fire and Blasphemy of the Spirit
Pastor John MacArthur has announced a âstrange fireâ conference to be held this October, claiming that part of the charismatic movement âoffers to God unacceptable worship, distorted worship. It blasphemes the Holy Spirit. It attributes to the Holy Spirit even the work of Satan.â
If these charges are true, this means that many leaders in the charismatic movement have committed the unpardonable sin and are therefore hell-bound. If these charges are not true, Pastor MacArthur has seriously overstepped his bounds and misused the Word of God.
And it is only fair to ask whether Pastor MacArthur, in his rightful zeal to correct excesses or errors in the charismatic movementâwhat he calls âstrange fireââis also guilty of rejecting the true fire. Does he embrace the glorious things the Holy Spirit is doing worldwide, resulting in the salvation of tens of millions of souls, or does he write them off as...
Unprofitable Servant wrote: Have to agree with John UK, you are playing a game with semantics and changing meanings of verses. The fact that any perish means God is willing to let them perish. The amazing thing is that He saves any from everlasting destruction. Thank God He does!!
All excellent points, US.
Yes, the fact that he saves some is truly wonderful. Some well-meaning folks imagine that God is unjust to punish criminals who break his laws. This is down to poor preaching I believe. The rottenness of the human heart (deceitful above all things and desperately wicked) needs to be better understood and grieved over. Then, the slightest bit of God's grace will be seen in its true light, a most wonderful thing. This grace is not something which anyone has a right to, or deserves, but is poured out from God's bountiful supply of mercy, when he chooses, and upon whom he chooses. And when men can say, "God is good" and mean it, they will have no problem with justice and mercy coming from the throne.
Have to agree with John UK, you are playing a game with semantics and changing meanings of verses. The fact that any perish means God is willing to let them perish. The amazing thing is that He saves any from everlasting destruction. Thank God He does!!
Love the backflips of the new Calvinists. The scripture was God is not willing that any should perish...you misdirected the quote and the answer better than a politician. In unconditional election God is willing that some perish. It's plain it's simple, and it does not line up with scripture. You can't just pick a different scripture that massages the point better. That's what the cults do. If its sola scriptural it is all of scripture not just the ones that fit.
First of all the scriptural context of blaspheming the Holy Spirit was contributing the works of the Holy Spirit to satan, not the works of satan to the Holy Spirit. And if they are the works of the Holy Spirit then it is more likely John would be in the context of blaspheming the Holy Spirit. I am not ready to throw that accusation anyone's way and I think it is foolish for anyone to do so.
Jim, the "oldest mss" do not assure me that they are correct. There are plenty of extremely old spurious mss which heretics love to play with. The TR has "us", and I am content. Thankfully, the MV does not make any great difference to the outcome of the text.
When your Bible has a marginal note, saying "the oldest manuscripts have blah blah", please do not accept that as saying, "the oldest mss have it". Because if they did have it, would it not then have been in the main text instead of the margin?
Thinking is required when it comes to Bible Versions.
2 Peter 3 9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.---NASB
John U.K., as you noticed I rarely put up the same verses as others, to actually avoid the battle of the Bible versions, but in this case.
JFB Commentary for the above wrote: .... long-sufferingâwaiting until the full number of those appointed to "salvation" (2Pe 3:15) shall be completed. to us-wardâThe oldest manuscripts, Vulgate, Syriac, &c., read, "towards YOU." anyânot desiring that any, yea, even that the scoffers, should perish, which would be the result if He did not give space for repentance. comeâgo and be received to repentance: the Greek implies there is room for their being received to repentance (compare Greek, Mk 2:2,Joh 8:37).
2 Peter 3 14 Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless, 15 and regard the patience of our Lord to be salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you,---NASB
Collin Sellars wrote: Sorry Mike NY, the 'allegedly' doesn't get you off the hook, because that is what those who believe in unconditional election espouse. No 'allegedly' about it.
Agree that is what is espoused. My use of "allegedly" pertains to whether that which is espoused is true. e.g., When it is said "God passes them by" that is an allegation, an assertion. If some believe it to be true, does it become less alleged merely because it is believed?
perception2 wrote: 1. Why does Michael add the phrase "long before Augustine and Calvin"?
2. Oh Look! In Michael's theological expertise the Calvinists have got it wrong again.
perception2 Oops, looks like I've displeased another Calvinist.
P2 for the record it is NOT that I'm any great theological expert but that some certain Calvinists have been so ahhhhh, would the word be gracious? to teach me.
Seriously now, the Faith God Himself authors (wants us to have too) is in His word the Bible, and of course one of the things SCC's are famous for is Sola Scriptura. Oops, only if someone believes the Bible like they do, infant sprinkling, Calvinists replacing Israel, and let's not forget aaaaaah, would the word be a rabbid animosity against "Arminians"...can't have God predestinating any of those kind to believe His PROMISES AND BE one of His children forever, can we.
So for you who are a precious child of God, please don't let any Theological Expert keep you from being a present day Berean, believing the PROMISES God Himself in His Sovereignty has made to you BECAUSE he (or she) who believes in Him will not be disappointed even like Abraham and Sarah.
Michael Hranek wrote: 1. God knows His children need much Biblical encouragement in the Faith that was once for all delivered to the saint (long before Augustine and Calvin) ...
2. IMHO our dear Calvinists sometimes unintending to do so choke out AND fail to preach the idea of: God has PROMISED you can believe Him!
1. Why does Michael add the phrase "long before Augustine and Calvin"? Is there historic relevance to the fact of when these two men were born? Or does Michael make a point from his heart here that Augustine and Calvin were wrong in their doctrines? Faith according to Michael was delivered long before Augustine and Calvin lived - well obviously since faith started at the beginning of the world.
Faith was delivered Long Long Long Long before Michael was ever thought of. So why should we believe anything he says? That apparently is the token of his argument here. Perhaps if they had been born earlier then they would be as expert as Michael?
2. Oh Look! In Michael's theological expertise the Calvinists have got it wrong again. What a sweeping statement to dismiss all quote, "Calvinists" in error, according to Michael, but then we must remember Michael is superior theologically to everybody who dares to study doctrine.
the point I'm making, and I've been pondering this for quite awhile...
is that Mac should repent of his spiritual leadership regarding Iq.
the premises we have found to be untruthful, and by perpetuating that we were in the right, based on these premises continues on today.
the diaspora and martydom of hundreds of thousands of Christians. neither the conservatives and their foolish leaders nor the liberals and their foolish leaders will repent and stop this drunken spiritual fest, but blame the other for the terrible woes...
I read an article written by him recently, in which he defended his position still. I would like to know what philosophies he holds that puts some idea or agenda above the lives of innocents, especially Christians.
remember, we were told this was for the good of the innocent.
the final straw was seeing B and O and McC sit in front of the camera before that election, and spout the need for the bailouts. we watched trillions upon trillions in the next few years. it began with a united endorsement.
Christians better wake up. And I don't mean so they can have prosperity again, but what will God do with a generation that celebrated as their brethren fell under the iron fist?
I repented in sorrow for putting God's name on filthy lucre.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, as the real Jim would say. Thanks...who the "us" refers to clears it up. Still a confusing subject, overall, I think. Difficult to comprehend, but will sink in one fine day...thx.
To continue with the text which you so kindly furnished *us* with this morning. [please consider the word "us" in context, it means not the "whole world".]
Now here we have the text in view:
2 Peter 3:9 KJV 9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward [or "towards us"], not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
The interpretation will depend entirely on how you treat the little word "us".
If it refers to humankind, then it can be said that God desires the salvation through repentance and faith of every man, woman and child. This would be nice to think, but sadly will clash with too much other scriptures which would go contrary to that thought.
If it refers to the saints, seeing as the letter is written to saints, it will make more sense and do no despite to other scriptures. In other words, it agrees with scripture as a whole. God's elect, chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, are recipients of God's will for them in Christ, he is longsuffering with them, and eventually brings them to repentance and salvation. It is God's will that ALL should come to repentance, and ALL will come to repentance.
Colin Sellars wrote: Mike's logic appears to be that if God is not involved in the one he cannot be in the other. Of course this logic is nonsense and a cheap and aimless jibe at those who believe in unconditional election.
Captsensible, also a hit-and-run poster, would agree with you. He missed the "allegedly" as well. I should repent, being overwhelmed by irrefutable truth.
Thanks John and Michael. John, nice to hear from you. I really don't understand either but it may be too early and will think it all over more after reading again. John, where is your fav pilgrim, Frank at? Probably wanted to take a rest from sime coming at him. Michael. ..still sitting on the emails. I just don't want to be rushing and send just a line or two back to you after you out so much time into the content.. Thanks for the last one as well
Christopher000 wrote: I had a verse in my head yesterday when thinking about the pre-elected; foreordained, as opposed to those who seemingly never have a chance. What about, and it's from memory: "...it's not my will that any should perish, but that all should have eternal life " Hopefully I have that right.
Christopher000 God knows His children need much Biblical encouragement in the Faith that was once for all delivered to the saint (long before Augustine and Calvin) in the perilous times we are living in. Let me offer you this:
Consider what God shows us in Abraham 100 yrs old, a 90 year old wife Any possibility (humanly) for a child?
Yet Abraham with respect for the PROMISE of God did not waiver in unbelief but grew strong in faith giving glory to God
IMHO our dear Calvinists sometimes unintending to do so choke out AND fail to preach the idea of: God has PROMISED you can believe Him!
Does God have plans He made before the foundation of the world that He will carry out? Of course He does! Are these plans contrary to His PROMISE, to people actually daring to believe His PROMISES? I don't think so...AT ALL! And shame on anyone who would put a stumbling block in the way of anyone believing them either.
2 Peter 3:9 KJV 9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Christopher, I think the key word here is "repentance". Without this, men will perish in their sins. And God will judge them for their sins. They will be damned because they rebelled against the Most High God, broke his laws, persecuted his people, blasphemed the lovely name of Christ.
God now commandeth all men everywhere to repent.
But men say, "I don't want to repent."
Okay, then they perish.
Those that perish never once say to God, "But I was not able to repent."
I had a verse in my head yesterday when thinking about the pre-elected; foreordained, as opposed to those who seemingly never have a chance.
What about, and it's from memory: "...it's not my will that any should perish, but that all should have eternal life " Hopefully I have that right. I take this to mean every man, woman, and child ever born...ever to be born. I was wondering how this sits alongside pre-election and the thought that we have nothing to do with answering His call. While thinking about that, I also wonder about, "Many are called, but few are chosen". The word that gives me problems is "many", as opposed to "all" which leads me right back to pre-election, I guess, but why put the call out in the 1st place if we have nothing to do with being chosen? Hopefully I got my thoughts out correctly. Sometimes I'm the only one who knows what I'm thinking no matter how I try to explain...ha-ha..