- Joined
- Jul 19, 2015
- Messages
- 990
- Reaction score
- 59
- Points
- 28
Andy Stanley is a false teacher and a modeslist as is false teacher Ed Young Jr. Todd Friel and John MacArthur have called Young and Stanley false teachers.
Andy Stanley: Throw Away The Bible!
- Thread starter HammondCheese
- Start date
TonyHutsonComedian said:
Modeslist? Whazzat?
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2015
- Messages
- 990
- Reaction score
- 59
- Points
- 28
Izdaari said:
Modelist is someone who doesn't believe in the Trinity. TBN/PTL Club Prosperity false teacher TD Jakes Believes in that as do false teachers Joel Osteen/Carl Lentz/Steven Furtick and "fake" Christian Josh Harris.
TonyHutsonComedian said:
Ah, ok, thanks. Modalist I think. It was the spelling that threw me. Though I'm not a fundamentalist, I defiinitely believe in the Trinity.
TonyHutsonComedian said:
Since many in the IFBx world still call MacArthur a false teacher, do they think he is a false teacher in proclaiming Stanley a false teacher?
I need a scorecard.
Steven L. Anderson just went through a purging of Modalists. Don't know that he will care for any advice from MacArthur, especially since he hates running. Will have to find abd share the You Tube video to explainTwisted said:
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2018
- Messages
- 149
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Steven Anderson brags about being banned from 34 countries... I'm pretty sure his ultimate goal is to make the Top 10 on the FBI's Most Wanted List...Baptist City Holdout said:
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
HammondCheese said:
I know a man who made that list.
IFB, of course.
Re: John MacArthur
I have his study bible (NKJV), and I love/hate it. He does know a lot, but he's dead certain about everything, and IMO dead wrong on quite a few of those things he's so certain about. But I'm not sure I'd call him a false teacher. He and I have plenty of disagreements, but I can't point to anything I'd consider an actual heresy. Unless he's a modalist, because that kind of is.
I have his study bible (NKJV), and I love/hate it. He does know a lot, but he's dead certain about everything, and IMO dead wrong on quite a few of those things he's so certain about. But I'm not sure I'd call him a false teacher. He and I have plenty of disagreements, but I can't point to anything I'd consider an actual heresy. Unless he's a modalist, because that kind of is.
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2015
- Messages
- 990
- Reaction score
- 59
- Points
- 28
Actually heard Hutson say good things about MacArthur which is weird. On top of that, Larry Brown and Jack Hyles were noted for their disdain of MacArthur. I glanced through the MacArthur study Bible and he is knowledgeable. He's no comedian. Leave the Comedy to Tony Hutson and Larry Brown. Also Todd Friel of Wretched has called Andy Stanley and Steven Furtick both heretics numerous times.
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2018
- Messages
- 149
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
I don't agree with MacArthur on the blood doctrine which is a big deal for me, and I consider him more of a tweener when it comes to Reformed Theology, but he is one of the greatest Bible teachers of our time.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
HammondCheese said:
The version the Sword crowd pushes, or the actual version MacArthur teaches?
HammondCheese said:
If your speaking of the 5 points of Calvinism John MacArthur is no "tweener." He doesn't believe in reprobation and he disagrees with Pink on God not loving the unelected but he is very strong on TULIP. He also is more dispensational (when it comes to Israel) and less covenant theology so he would differ with reformed theology there as well.
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2018
- Messages
- 149
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
The version from the lips of MacArthur himself... He attributes atonement only to the death of Christ, not the shedding of His precious blood. Meaning that he could have died through suffocation, drowning, etc.voicecrying said:
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
The version from the lips of MacArthur himself... He attributes atonement only to the death of Christ, not the shedding of His precious blood. Meaning that he could have died through suffocation, drowning, etc.HammondCheese said:
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
[/quote]
I've read what MacArthur wrote on the subject but it's been a while, so I could be mis-remembering, but I seem to recall that he plainly denied it could have been any other means of death. Now I have to go look it up again.
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2018
- Messages
- 149
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Here is MacArthur's best summation of where he stands... He recognizes both extreme sides to the argument as truth but humbly and rightly denies our ability to grasp God's perspective when our logic fails...
Although I do disagree with his exegesis of predestination itself. I'm more of a "foreknowledge" guy myself.
https://youtu.be/VEH-X2rP0WM
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2018
- Messages
- 149
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Here you go... Hope this saves you the time researching. [emoji12] The blood of Christ is NO euphemism!
https://youtu.be/vcmUAcIqZxk
HammondCheese said:
Here's a link that explains his position more fully:
https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/80-44/the-blood-of-christ
The video is mixing up the meaning of blood between MacArthur's use of the term versus the meaning in Bible verses.