Bible with MacArthur translation. A Brief Review of the Study Bible with Commentary by John MacArthur. Historical background and writing background

I am not afraid to affirmatively state that for 9 years the Study Bible with the comments of 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: Geneva Bible, the Scofield Bible, the Thompson Bible, and others, the MacArthur Commentary Bible took the lead among them. This is not surprising, since the work itself is unique due to the original review of each book of the Bible (more on this below), contains more than 25,000 different notes and explanations for the text, is 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 language, which is a huge blessing for many Christians in Muslim countries.

A little about the author. John MacArthur is the 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 to his love for God, devotion to the Scriptures, and expository preaching. The author speaks the original languages ​​of the Bible and researched the Holy Scripture word by word and verse by verse. At the same time, he turned to 25-30 commentaries each time in order to check the explained text. John MacArthur is the author of over 100 books, including a detailed commentary on every 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 faithfulness 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 appeared. The truth concerning the inspiration and infallibility of the nature of the Word of God is proclaimed affirmatively and authoritatively. John MacArthur gives advice on how to properly study the Scriptures and walks you through a step-by-step process.

Structure of the Study Bible
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 columns of cross-references, highlighting certain words and phrases for their better understanding
3. If a word in the Bible is not clear, 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 understandable language (daughter = daughter)
5. Each Bible verse is given a detailed explanation.
6. A detailed reasoned and authoritative review of the books of the Old and New Testaments:
In my opinion, John MacArthur's (and his team) review of the Scriptures is systematic, written in accessible language, and is an objective and authoritative work both in the field of theology and in popularized reading for members of the church.

The review of each book 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 a city (for example, the epistle to the Romans), then brief information is given about the city to whose church the epistle is 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 view is information aboutauthor and time of writing.
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 indicated, then the names of the alleged authors are given. Naturally, the epistles and books are difficult to date, and approximate dating is given on the basis of biblical sources, historical and archaeological information, as well as the works of early Christian church authors such as Origen, Eusebius of Caesarea and others.

Next we can seehistorical background and book writing background.
This section is unique in that it characterizes the society in which the books of the Bible were written; what was the purpose of the author when writing the book; what language is the book or message in; the reason for writing the book. We can read about the religious situation of that time, in particular, about heresy, in condemnation and warning against which the epistle or book of the Bible was written.

The author also considershistorical and theological topics .
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 in the review of the four Gospels we can see that Matthew presents Jesus as the King of the Jews, interest in the Old Testament Kingdom promises runs throughout 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 item in the review isproblems of interpretation
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 writes the introduction. In this case, MacArthur invites us to consider different points of view, and only then in the comments does he give his position regarding his approved opinion. The author points to those places of Holy Scripture, the interpretation of which causes different opinions. For example, what is sin unto 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 considered in the comments below.

7. There is a detailed plan for each book of the Bible.
8. Throughout the Bible, black-and-white maps, diagrams, tables, plans of books are given that 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, there is no better source (concerning study Bibles) in Russian.
I advise everyone to get a Bible with the commentaries of John MacArthur

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 dwells in them abundantly (Col. 3:16). Therefore, at the center of my ministry, I put helping the people of God in the knowledge of His Word - an occupation very useful for spiritual growth.

John MacArthur - New Testament - Commentaries - Bible Quote module - BibleQuote

The module is based on the texts of a series of books by John MacArthur "Interpretation of the books of the New Testament", publications of the CEO, "The Bible for All", etc.

John MacArthur - New Testament - Commentaries - Bible Quote module - BibleQuote - Module Contents

• 1. Gospel of Matthew - added 01/29/13
• 2. Jacob - added 03/22/14
• 3. 1 Epistle of Ap. Petra - added 05/17/16
• 4. Romans
• 5. 1st Corinthians
• 6. Galatians - added 09.07.17
• 6. Ephesians
• 7. Colossians
• 8. 1 Timothy
• 9. 2 Timothy
• 10. Titu
• 11. Philemon

John MacArthur - New Testament - Interpretations - Bible Quote module - BibleQuote - 1 Corinthians 12 - The Origin and Detection of Counterfeit Spiritual Gifts

“I don’t want to leave you, brethren, in ignorance about spiritual gifts. You know that when you were pagans, you went to mute idols - as if they were leading you. Therefore, I tell you that no one who speaks by the Spirit of God will utter anathema against Jesus, and no one can call Jesus Lord except by the Holy Spirit" (12:1-3).

This passage begins the section dealing with spiritual gifts (chapters 12-14). Today, these issues are controversial among many sections of the people who profess Christianity. Perhaps in no other area of ​​biblical teaching has there been so much misunderstanding and abuse, and even within evangelical churches, as in the area of ​​spiritual gifts. Yet there is no aspect of doctrine more important to the spiritual health and efficiency of the church than this. Apart from the fact that in this way the power of the Holy Spirit is directly manifested, for the believers themselves there is nothing more life-giving than the action of the spiritual gifts given to them. After all, this is their destiny in God, those abilities that are given to them for Christian service.

Contrary to the perception of many people, the true church of Jesus Christ is not a human organization that everyone is. we can see and which is controlled by a hierarchy of officials. The church is not a social agency for meeting the needs and wants of the community, nor is it merely a convenient place for funerals or christenings and marriages. And, of course, the church is not a social religious club where people who adhere to similar religious beliefs and norms of behavior gather in order to communicate and, on occasion, for possible events.

The Church, as it was established by Jesus Christ, described and defined in the New Testament, is a living organism. This is the spiritual body of Christ, who is her Head, her Lord. The members of this body are wholly and exclusively those who, through faith in Him as their Savior and Lord, have become a new creation. Although the church members are human, it is not a human organization. It is a supernatural organism created, established, authorized and directed by the Lord Himself. For the head of the church is eternal and indestructible, and the church is eternal and indestructible. Jesus assures us that even "the gates of hell will not prevail against her" (Matt. 16:18).

Every member of Christ's church has been gifted with supernatural powers, gifts of God's Holy Spirit. These are the means by which God carries out the ministry of the Holy Word and power among His people, as well as the ministry of the world. With these gifts God supernaturally provides the believers of the church and the evangelization of the world. These gifts are intended for believers to grow spiritually, learn to honor God more and more, testify about Him and fulfill Christian ministry.

True spiritual gifts are given by God in order to strengthen believers, to show their unity, harmony and strength. Satan's counterfeit gifts are meant to divide, undermine, and weaken. God's gifts instruct, help grow; satanic counterfeits are pulling down.

The Corinthian church, like many churches today, was seriously affected by both the counterfeiting of spiritual gifts and their misunderstanding and misuse. Some of the Corinthian believers recognized this trouble, and chapters 12-14 of the epistle continue to answer the same questions about which they wrote to Paul (7:1): In addition to the questions raised and reflected in the letter to Paul, he learned about other difficulties "from household Chloe" (1:11) and from "Stephanius, Fortunatus and Achaik" (16:17). Judging by the doctrine of spiritual gifts that Paul is expounding here, the questions included questions such as: What are spiritual gifts? How many x are there? Does every believer have them? How important are they to the life of the individual Christian and to the life of the church? What is the baptism in the Holy Spirit, and how does it relate to spiritual gifts? Are all gifts given in every age of the church, or were some gifts given only for a specific purpose and for a limited time? Can gifts be counterfeit? If so, how can believers tell true gifts from false ones? Paul answers these and many other questions in detail.

Just as they perverted almost everything else, the Corinthians perverted the nature, purpose, and use of spiritual gifts. These distortions, like others, owed much of their origin to the ideas and practices that the Corinthians brought into the church from their pagan past. The old life constantly stained the new. They did not separate from the ways of their former life and, in fact, still clung tightly to what was "unclean" (2 Cor. 6:14-17). Although they were rich and perfectly endowed with gifts (1 Cor. 1:7), they were poor in understanding these gifts, and irresponsible in applying them.

Created: 12/28/2017 , 2944 6

"Don't say we have found wisdom: God will refute it, not man" (Job 32:13)

The history of Christianity knows many excellent theologians who carried the Word of God to people, pointing to the way of salvation for millions of people. Modern Christianity has a number of well-known names of theologians who in one way or another have influenced the preaching of the Gospel throughout the world. One such contemporary theologian who has some influence on Christians around the world is John Fullerton MacArthur, Jr. In short, he can be said to be an American pastor of the non-denominational Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, California. MacArthur is the author of over 150 Christian books, with the Study Bible being the most published work, with more than a million copies sold. Interestingly, some sources of information call John MacArthur a Baptist pastor and preacher, although in reality he is the pastor of a church that does not identify itself with any of the denominations. Apparently, the similarity with the Baptists, in the form and process of serving 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, and even the doctrines inherent in Seventh-day Adventists, immediately catch the eye. Also, the books of John MacArthur can be seen in the libraries of various denominations, and not only among the Baptists. Although it should be mentioned that MacArthur is opposed to 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 stands apart, containing short comments and explanations of Bible texts. The Study Bible contains an excerpt from MacArthur's multi-volume edition of the Commentaries of the Bible Books. To be fair, there is a lot of good information in the MacArthur Study Bible, especially in describing the historical background of the Biblical events. But at the same time, dogma is permeated with statements that contradict not only the Biblical context, but even themselves. Here we will look at some of John MacArthur's controversial dogmatic statements that found their way into 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 condensed 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 Nestle-Aland. This edition lacks a number of Bible texts found in all Reformation Bibles. Here we will not consider in detail the features of critical texts, but you can read about them in our articles: "The correct translation of the Bible", "Gnosticism in the critical texts of the New Testament", "False landmark in the book of Bruce Metzger -" Textology of the New Testament ", and" Bible. The struggle of the Catholic Church against the Reformation at the hands of the Protestants and Reformers themselves. Interestingly, the Russian version of MacArthur's Study Bible uses Synodal translation, where there are missing texts, and the reader in the comments to these verses sees the following inscription: "this verse is missing in the most common manuscripts." For example, this can be found in the comments 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 Reformation Bibles, for example, Matthew 23:14 in the New Version looks like this: "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 appears differently: "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 are you asking me about good?”, and the focus is shifted from the person of Jesus Christ to “good” or “common good”, which is the basic issue 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 all but God are sinners” (MacArthur Study Bible). And here we see embarrassment when MacArthur refuses to see words about goodness in the text of the modern translation, and comments on the text contained in the translation of King James (King James), about the person of Jesus Christ. This leads the reader to wonder why MacArthur is quoting words that are not recorded in the modern translation that the reader is currently seeing? The same is true of Matthew 17:21, Matthew 23:14, and Acts 8:37. This is a gross inconsistency and careless attitude of MacArthur to the Biblical texts, which raises many questions from the reader. As for the Russian 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 Biblical 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 that the texts of the Septuagint were still in the pre-Christian period, and were used by Greek-speaking Jews. This was reflected in the comments of MacArthur, for example, we read in the Bible: "Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and they shall call his name Immanuel, which means, God is with us" (Matthew 1:23). Commenting on this text, MacArthur says: "Virgin" - Theologians sometimes debate whether the Hebrew term in Is. 7:14 "virgin" or "girl". Matthew is quoting here from the Septuagint, which uses an unambiguous interpretation of the Greek term "virgin" (MacArthur Study Bible). Let's think about why it was necessary for Matthew, who was a Jew living in Israel, where they spoke mainly in Hebrew and Aramaic, and also read the Scriptures in Hebrew, 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: "And while He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples approached Him in private and asked: Tell us, when will this 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, lit. “presence”), they did not imagine that the Second Coming would be in the distant future. They spoke of His triumphant coming as the Messiah as an event that (they had no doubt) would happen very soon. Even if they were aware of His approaching death, which He clearly and repeatedly prophesied about (see note on 20:19), they did not anticipate that there would be His Ascension and the long life of the church. 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 comment, MacArthur comes to the conclusion that Jesus Christ, speaking to the disciples in Hebrew, suddenly uses the Greek word "parousia", ignoring that the Gospel of Matthew was written after the ascension of Christ and was a translation of His words into Greek, and Jesus himself did not speak Greek with the students. That is, not only the Apostles quoted the Greek text of the Old Testament, but even 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 came into being already in the Christian period, which can be read in our article "The Septuagint - what is it?" .

There is an opinion that it is quite possible that the Jews in the 1st century spoke state languages the Roman Empire, and since the time of the Babylonian captivity, the Jews stopped speaking their native language. As a result, 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 talks 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 Hebrew, 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 Jewish. If the Jews lost the Hebrew language and did not speak it, then why was the inscription written in this language? Another important fact of the use of the Hebrew language was the communication in it by the Jews themselves, which can be seen below:

- “When he allowed it, Paul, standing on the stairs, signaled 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 become even more quiet. He said" (Acts 22:2);

- "We all fell to the ground and I heard a voice saying to me in Hebrew: Saul, Saul! why are you chasing me? It is hard for you to go against the pricks" (Acts of the Apostles 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 testify that during the period of the life of the Apostles, the Hebrew language was widely spoken among the Jews, and they fully spoke it. This does not change the fact that the Aramaic language was also in use among the Jews, just as well as the fact that they could know the Greek language. However, we do not find cases in the Bible when the Apostles spoke to the Jews in Greek. This situation baffles MacArthur's words that Jesus Christ addressed the Apostles in Greek, and specifically used certain Greek words.

In addition, the Holy Scriptures among the Jews were preserved in Hebrew, as evidenced by the archaeological excavations of the Dead Sea Scrolls, where a large number of manuscripts of the period of the I-II centuries. Here, the largest number of texts of Scripture was found in Hebrew, which eliminates the idea that the Jews of the 1st century did not use the Scripture in Hebrew.

All of the above shows that MacArthur, in trying to show that Christ spoke Greek to the Apostles, made a failed attempt to make believe that the Jews of the 1st century used the Greek Septuagint as Scripture.

Basis of Judaism. Sometimes in the Bible commentaries of John MacArthur you can find rather strange words. One such moment is a comment on the following text: “So also we, while we were children, were enslaved to the things of the world” (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 denoted fundamental things, for example, the letters of the alphabet. In the light of its application in Art. 9, the word here is best seen as a reference to the basic elements and rituals of human religion (see explanation of Col. 2:8). Paul describes the Jewish and Gentile religions as simply human, never reaching God's level. Both Jewish and pagan religions rely on a man-made system of affairs. They are full of rites and ceremonies to be performed in order to achieve God's favor. All these outward elements are immature, as is the case with children who are subject to their caregivers.” (MacArthur Study Bible). From this we see that MacArthur claims that the Jewish religion, that is, Judaism, contains human rituals at its core. After all, we know that Judaism is based on the Law given by God through Moses, and the rituals that are in Judaism are given by God. But MacArthur sees that the rituals in Judaism are human, which is inconsistent with the context of the Bible and contradicts it. Perhaps MacArthur means by Judaism the 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, Litvaks, Karaites, and so on. Particularly 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 is the words of God, and not of man, including in terms of rituals.

Demons in the dungeon. On the question of Judaism, John MacArthur's strange remarks did not end, and one can see a rather exotic commentary on the following Biblical text: "For even Christ, 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 made alive by the Spirit, by which He descended and preached to the spirits in prison, who had once been disobedient to the longsuffering of God that awaited them, in the days of Noah, at the time of the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved by the water" (1 Peter 3:18-20). Regarding this text, MacArthur says the following: "in the prison of the spirits" Refers to fallen angels (demons) who are forever bound in chains because of their great malice. Demons who are not yet in hell resist such a sentence (cf. Luke 8:31). In the end, they will all be cast into the lake of fire forever (Matt. 25:41; Rev. 20:10). preached Between Christ's death and the resurrection, His Spirit descended to the demons in hell and preached there that despite His death, He had triumphed over them (see notes on Col. 2:14,15). rebellious... in the days of Noah, Peter further explains that hell is inhabited by demons who have been there since the time of Noah and who got there because their rebelliousness overwhelmed God's patience. In the days of Noah, demons revolted on earth, filled the world with their wickedness, meanness, deeds that are 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 for 8 people from Noah's Family (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 died during the flood. This view is also held 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). Undoubtedly, Peter was referring to spirit creatures who decided to join Satan's rebellion. Jude mentions angels “not retaining their original position, but leaving their proper dwelling”, and says that God “saves [them] in eternal fetters under the cover of hopeless darkness for the judgment of the great day” (Jude 6) ... Probably after what It was some time after his resurrection that Jesus announced to the evil spirits that they were in for an absolutely deserved punishment. Such preaching gave them no hope. It was a condemnation sermon (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 announce such a conviction” (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 are some of them in prison, and some are free today, what is the difference between them? In this text it says "the longsuffering of God that waited", which means that God waited and endured a long time. What was God expecting? 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 they were demons, and not people from the time of the flood? In general, this interpretation of this text leads to even more questions than the answers received.

About the oath. Quite interestingly, MacArthur imagines the pronunciation of oaths, in the light of the New Testament, for example, 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, for it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King; nor by your head do you swear, for you cannot make one hair white or black. But let your word be yes, yes; no, no; but anything more than 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." Cf. James 5:12. This passage should not be taken as a 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 (e.g., Num. 5:19, 21; 30:2, 3)" (MacArthur Study Bible). In this short text, John MacArthur made some serious claims that need to be considered in more detail.

First, he claims that Christ spoke under oath, referring to 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? Matthew 26:63-64). MacArthur understands this text as follows: "I conjure." See note on 5:34. Caiaphas tried to break Jesus' silence (v. 62). The oath was supposed to legally compel Him to answer. Jesus' answer (v. 64) suggests that He took the oath" (Study Bible MacArthur). That is, he claims that the words "I 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, so 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 the evil spirit that 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 the pronunciation of the text of the oath. But Christ did not swear an oath, and the fact that He answered the high priest did not mean at all that he took the oath, this is simply not in the text of the Bible.

Second, MacArthur contends that Matthew 5:34 does not refer to relinquishing an oath, and suggests comparing it with James 5:12, which says: "First of all, my brethren, swear not by heaven or earth, and no other oath but let it be with you yes, yes, and no, no, lest you fall under condemnation" (James 5:12). However, this text says "by no other oath," which includes any oath. In fact, this text does not leave a single possible variant of the 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 pastor of a non-denominational church, is the acceptance of certain dogmas from various denominations. One such teaching is the view of the Law given to Moses and its place in the Christian life, of which John MacArthur says the following: “Between the Jew and the Gentile, the greatest barrier was raised in the form of a ceremonial law - the Law of commandments. Christ abolished festivals, sacrifices, fees, laws, purifications and sanctifications, and all the commandments that distinguished Israel, which constituted its unique characteristics. But God has not abolished His moral law, as the word doctrine indicates. His moral law reflects His holy nature and is therefore never subject to change (cf. Matt. 5:17-19). This law was expressed in the ten commandments given to the Jews, and is written in all human hearts" (John MacArthur, Commentary on the Books of the New Testament, Epistle to the Ephesians, Chapter 7 - "The Unity of the Body - the Church") . These words clearly show the teaching of the Seventh-day Adventists about the division of the Law into ceremonial and moral, and that Christ abolished precisely the ceremonial law, but left the moral law. This idea is exactly repeated by MacArthur, which is reflected in the interpretation of many other texts of the Bible, for example, in the following text of the Bible:"but to the false brethren who crept in, who came secretly to spy on our freedom, which we have in Christ Jesus, to bring us into bondage" (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 ordinances as a way of life, and from the curse for disobedience to the law - the curse that Christ bore for all believers (3:13) ”(MacArthur Study Bible) . Here we see the statement that Christians are not saved by the law, where MacArthur means external rites and ordinances of a way of life. But here the question arises, what is meant by the regulations of the way of life? If this is meant by the moral standards of the Law, then MacArthur contradicts himself, because in the interpretation discussed earlier, he claims that the moral Law has remained. But what is important here is not even this, 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 a ceremonial or moral law, such as the ordinance refusing to eat blood. What part of the law does this apply to? If to the moral, then by what sign 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, so they renewed the commandment that Christ abolished? There are many such commandments, and the adherents of the division of the Law create difficulties for themselves. As already mentioned, this idea was taken from the Adventists, and supported by MacArthur. Another theologian, William MacDonald, spoke well about 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 uninformed, and they seem to attach great importance to the Scriptures. But they soon subject their followers to the law of Moses, emphasizing in particular 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 is clearly stated in Galatians? The answer is that they distinguish between the moral law and the ceremonial. The moral law is the Ten Commandments. The ceremonial law is other regulations given by God, such as rules regarding unclean food, leprosy, offerings to God, etc. The moral law, they say, has never been repealed. It is an expression of the eternal truth of God. To engage in idolatry, to commit murder or adultery is always 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 the same, and that cursed are those who seek to achieve righteousness by it, and at the same time fail to keep it completely” (William MacDonald, Commentary on Galatians, 6 chapter) .

The division of the Law into moral and ceremonial leads John MacArthur to misinterpret some other important places in the Bible, for example, we read the text of the Apostle Paul about the New Testament: "By saying 'new', he showed the oldness of the first; but what is old and old is close to destruction" (Hebrews 8:13). Following the views of the Adventists, MacArthur comes to the following interpretation: "close to destruction." Shortly after the writing 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 under 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. Such a division is a juggling of facts, which is not displayed in any way in the text.

Commandments of Jesus Christ. John MacArthur accepted 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, but whoever kills is subject to judgment. But I tell you that everyone who is angry with his brother in vain is subject to judgment; whoever says to his brother: “cancer” is subject to the Sanhedrin; and whoever He will say, "He is foolish," he is subject to hellfire" (Matthew 5:21-22). MacArthur's commentary on this text reveals the essence of his views on the matter, where he says the following: "Christ did not change the words of the law in any of these scriptures. Rather, he corrected what they "heard", i.e. the rabbis' interpretation of the law" (MacArthur Study Bible). Here MacArthur argues 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 "whoever says:" foolish "is subject to hellfire"? This shows that MacArthur, like the Adventists, rejects the existence of the commandments of Jesus Christ, and the fact that Christ brought a new teaching that came to replace the commandments of the Law. In the 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 say to 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 were never 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 “but I say,” 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 uncomfortable text that directly points to 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, we read the text: "His disciples say to him, If such is the duty of a man to his wife, 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 obligation that marriage entails, and that Jesus set a very high standard by permitting divorce only as a last resort" (MacArthur Study Bible). Here MacArthur unexpectedly says that Jesus set the standard, that is, He gave some kind of decrees from Himself. Moreover, MacArthur says that Jesus even allowed divorce in a special case, that is, again Christ of Himself gave permission. Such a statement does not fit in any way with 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 in this way, or did he just explain the Law? This is a clear contradiction, where, on the one hand, Christ did not change anything in the matter of observance of the Law, and on the other hand, He made His decrees.

Election and Predestination. The central dogma of John MacArthur is the teaching of the Calvinists about God's predestination of people for salvation. For such claims, the main text of the Bible is usually the following: “For those 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). On understanding predestination, MacArthur says the following: "foreknew" - Not just an indication of God's omniscience - that in distant eternity He knew who would come to Christ. Here, rather, it refers to the choice of those whom His love will touch and with whom He will establish family relations, i.e., His election (cf. Acts 2:23, where the inviolable rule of Greek grammar indicates the relationship between "predestination" and “foreknowledge,” see notes on 1 Peter 1:2 and cf. 1:20—this word should be translated the same in both verses). See explanation on election at 9:10-24. "predetermined" - Literally "allocated, appointed or determined in advance." Whom God chooses, He determines to the final likeness of His Son (see notes on Ephesians 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 texts of the Bible, 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 but the Son, and to whom the Son wants to reveal. Come to Me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest" (Matthew 11:27 -28). MacArthur explains the text as follows: “This scripture reflects the first beatitude (5:3). Note that this open invitation, addressed to all who hear, is worded in such a way that only those who are aware of their spiritual poverty and who are frustrated in trying to be saved by the law will respond to this invitation. The stubbornness of people is such that without God-sent spiritual awakening, 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 work. The truth of God's election in v. 27 is not incompatible with the free offer of salvation to all in Art. 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 Himself, 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 for rejecting God's grace lies not with man, but with God. The Chosen One is one who was originally appointed prior to his creation, but MacArthur says that this does not conflict with the free offer of salvation. But the problem is that "appointment" and "freedom" are concepts that are not compatible initially. That is, he says that on the one hand, God appoints the saved in advance, and on the other hand, there is a freedom of choice 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.

The attempt to reconcile incompatible concepts leads MacArthur to a very unusual understanding of other texts of the Bible, such as those dealing with the punishment of sinners. To see an example of this understanding, we 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 does) mean spiritual death rather than eternal death. 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 the verse is one of salvation. A few verses above read: "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, death in verse 14 does not mean spiritual death, but eternal destruction, because one who is already spiritually dead cannot die spiritually.

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 they will betray one another, and they will hate one another” (Matthew 24:10). In MacArthur's study Bible, one can find the following interpretation: "many will be tempted Literally," they will be made to stumble, "" they will be led astray." 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 was never a believer, that is, he excludes that a true believer can fall away from the church. In other words, we can say that a person who fell away from the church was never saved.

2). "If he will not listen to them, tell the church; but if he will not listen to the church, then let him be to you, like a heathen and a publican" (Matthew 18:17). MacArthur sees the meaning of this text as follows: "The point is not simply to punish the sinner or completely avoid him, but to remove him from the community of the church as a harmful influence, and from now on treat him not as a brother, but as a object of evangelization" (MacArthur Study Bible). Here we see that he believes that a person removed from church society is an object of evangelization, that is, as if a person who does not believe, who is again called to repentance. This moment just raises a number of questions: why should anyone be evangelized if God has already determined in advance who will be saved? If the one who has fallen away from the church has never been a believer and saved, then he was not destined for salvation, then why evangelize him?

In interpreting these two texts, MacArthur contradicts himself, where, on the one hand, the principle, if it fell away from the church, means that it was never saved by the predestined God, and on the other hand, it needs to be evangelized, but it is not clear why, since the doctrine of predestination shows that that such a person will not help anything.

It is interesting that the teaching of the predestination of some people for salvation, and others for destruction, does not come from Calvinists, but was formed long ago in Islam. In fact, the doctrine of predestination corresponds to the words of the Koran, where the following words are said:

- “We created for Gehenna many jinn and people. They have hearts that do not understand, and eyes that do not see, and ears that do not hear. They are like cattle, but they are even more deluded. It is they who are the heedless ignoramuses.” (Quran 7:179);

- “... Thus Allah leads astray whom He wills, and guides whom He wills to the straight path.” (Quran 74:31).

The doctrine of predestination is very consistent with the Koran, because it turns out that God determined some of the people for salvation, which means that other people were originally determined for eternal death, which leads to the idea that they were originally created for this. Therefore, we can say that this is not only a Calvinist teaching, but also a Muslim one, which appeared earlier than Calvinism.

In fact, Romans 8 is not talking about the predestination from the beginning of the foundation of the world of some people for salvation, which is not in the text, but it is about the dignity and hope of Christians, and that God predestined Christians to be like the image of His Son, oh than we read in the text again: "For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. And whom He predestined, these He also called; and whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified" (Epistle Romans 8:29-30). From the text we see that God made a predestination, to be like the image of Christ, to those people whom He foreknew. The word "foreknowledge" according to explanatory dictionaries Ushakov and Efremova, it means "to know in advance." That is, God predestined those of whom He knew in advance that they would respond to His call. In other words, God's knowledge of the future in advance comes first, and only then the predestination of already saved people, so that they would be similar to the image of Christ. MacArthur, on the other hand, says: "It is rather about the choice of those who will be touched by His love." We emphasize once again that we are talking about predestination "to be like the image of Christ" for already saved Christians, and not 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 predestination for the death of someone, all this is not in the text. The text itself clearly emphasizes God's attitude towards the 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 contradictory statements by John MacArthur led him to a natural result - a contradictory understanding of the forgiveness of sins and salvation. To see what MacArthur thinks about forgiveness, look at the following Bible text, where Christ says the following about forgiveness: "But unless you forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive you your trespasses" (Matthew 6:15). Let's see what MacArthur's understanding of this text is: “It is not supposed here that God will leave without justification those who have already received the forgiveness which He gives to all believers. Forgiveness as a permanent and complete deliverance from the guilt and negative consequences of sin belongs to all who are in Christ (cf. John 5:24; Rom. 8:1; Eph. 1:7). Moreover, 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 the worldly corruption of sin; he does not repeat that cleansing from sin which is given to us with justification. It is comparable to washing the 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 an unbiblical position on predestination, MacArthur naturally falls into a 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 statement 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 redemption are inseparable from each other, for example, we read: "in whom we have redemption through his blood and the forgiveness of sins" (Colossians 1:14). If God does not forgive a person's sin, then MacArthur says that a sinner can enter the Kingdom of God, but the Apostle Peter asks John MacArthur a question: "And if the righteous is scarcely saved, where will the ungodly and sinful appear?" (1 Peter 4:18). Of course, MacArthur has already given his answer to this question, but it does not correspond to the Biblical teaching, because according to the Bible, nothing unclean will enter the Kingdom of God, as it is written: "And nothing unclean shall enter into it, nor anyone given over to abomination and falsehood, but only those who are written in the Lamb's book of life" (Revelation 21:27). A person who is not forgiven for sin is unclean and sinful, and such people cannot be in the Kingdom of God, no matter how much MacArthur would like it.

Conclusion. Although 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, being a non-denominational pastor of the church, made a synthesis of various teachings from different Christian denominations, which was reflected in his comments on the Bible. Therefore, the MacArthur Study Bible is a specific and controversial collection of biblical exegesis.

Address: P.O. Box 265, Washington, PA 15301-0265, USA

In his 30 year ministry, John MacArthur achieved worldwide influence through his Grace to You radio broadcasts, over two dozen books, twelve million tapes, Grace Church, and other vigorous enterprises. Undoubtedly, his religious influence and Calvinist interpretations of the Scriptures 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 on 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 MacArthur's Study Bible.

Prior to that theological war, in the 1980s, John MacArthur gained notoriety in secular newspapers throughout the United States because his church was persecuted for the suicide of Kenneth Nally, who received "advice" from those who worked in the Grace Commonwealth Church and subsequently followed to him. [Read more about this in The Believer's Conditional Security, 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 smoke screen on his part that has deceived many to undeservedly exalt his ministry. and accept the phraseology of his teaching and his conception of saving faith. Unfortunately, even some Christians who reject the "eternal security" theory have been misled by its ostentatious holiness!

The purpose of this pamphlet is to reveal some of the conflicting and unbiblical claims of John MacArthur's holiness teaching, as well as his surprisingly casual tolerance for sin in the lives of Christians. It must be understood that John MacArthur is a Calvinist and, therefore, a teacher of the concept of "eternal security" (also called the perseverance of the saints or the "saved once, saved forever" theory, abbreviated SACH). Therefore, his beloved doctrine of "saved once, saved forever" does not really allow him to teach true holiness as it is biblically defined. As you will see for yourself, this is impossible. Moreover, he cannot truly understand the essence of saving faith, because he only knows how to interpret the Holy Scriptures in order to remain in line with the false doctrine of “saved once, saved forever,” just like other such teachers. Therefore, gaps will always gape in his theology and paramount problems will remain, because his vital provisions are fatally vicious.

Never originally saved
Unlike the once-saved-forever teacher Charles Stanley, who teaches the incredible suggestion that a Christian can completely stop believing and still be saved (2), John MacArthur would say that such a person was never really originally saved. John MacArthur would have given the same deliberate response to a man who had a strong Christian testimony for many years, but later left the Lord and never returned!

Consequently, his teaching leaves the true zealous follower of Jesus unsure if he is truly a true follower or a deceiver who will later leave, 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, yet calls it saving faith and a holy life. Information about 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 down to the same level as Charles Stanley, Charles Ryrie and Zane Hodge, even though he believes that one must repent in order to be initially saved. (3) If you are one of many, you probably don't know this.

Sometimes it seems like MacArthurteaches against sin andfocuses on holiness. The following five quotations are a small selection of statements to show how John MacArthur sometimes condemns sin in the life of a Christian. With these statements he deceived many about 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, the children of Satan practice sin... A third reason why Christians cannot practice sin... (4)
And if we don't understand how heinous our sin is, we won't understand its consequences. (5)
Since God Himself is holy, He wants His people to be holy. A holy life separates us from the world. (6)
A holy life will give you courage before God. To do this, you need to regularly confess and leave sins. (7)

And when we become aware of personal sin, we should make it our lifelong habit to immediately get rid of it. The threat of sin also makes us spiritually anxious. (eight)

John MacArthur seems to emphasize holy conduct, turning away from sin, and developing 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 less well known, but is just as integral to his doctrine and ministry.

Revealing MacArthur's Representationsabout sin and temptation
Get ready to hear information about the other side of John MacArthur's teaching on sin in the Christian life, which is also related to the Calvinist "saved once, saved forever" theory and the false version of saving faith that it spawned:

…Sin does not cause the 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 will ultimately work for our good, including the worst: sin. His promise does not lessen the ugliness of sin or the beauty of holiness. Sin is truly evil and deserves 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 a holy life, proclaims that the sin of a Christian works for the good? Would you like to hear what he tells us about how sin worked for personal benefit in the lives of Adam and Eve, Kings David, Saul and Solomon, Judas Iscariot, Ananias and Sapphira, Imeneus, Philetus, people from the texts of Heb. 6:4-6; 10:26-29 etc.? Also, if temptation really does work for our good, then why does Jesus tell us to pray that we don't fall into temptation (Matt. 6:13)? To believe this lie of Calvinism and the theory of eternal security that sin and temptation work for the good is to teach a license to licentiousness, just like Jude said (Jude 3,4), even though it would obviously be flatly rejected!

The deadly doctrine of MacArthur
In his so-called Study Bible, John MacArthur also reveals his deadly teaching about 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 by Christ, and righteousness is 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, to do both temporal and eternal good for us... (14)
A believer can never be found guilty... (15)
Some people who followed these patterns of sinful life fell back into those old sins and needed to be reminded that if they returned to their former life completely, they would not inherit eternal salvation because their lifestyle indicates that they had never been saved before… (16)

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 fully return to their former lives as unbelievers before their sinful behavior indicates that they never really were saved? If they stop on this sinful path, only slightly before reaching its end, then they remain saved and have saving faith, even though they were and perhaps still are in almost all of those old disgusting sins that sent them to hell. prior to their initial salvation.

The image and foundations of life
Lifestyle and patterns are two of John MacArthur's key terms to describe his deceptive version of saving faith. Concerning them he teaches the following:
While believers can and do commit these sins [a list of sins is given in 1 Cor. 6:9,10], they are not the foundations of their life. (17)

God never allows sin that has no place at all in His Kingdom, nor any person whose lifestyle is habitual debauchery, uncleanness, or covetousness (see verse 3), because no such person is saved.... (eighteen)

Usually John MacArthur doesn't end up talking about how far you can go without becoming a practicing sinner or calling it a habit of life. However, he tells us what principles 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 sin imaginable. But David and Lot cannot serve as examples of "carnal" believers, whose whole lifestyle and desires are not at all different from those of unrepentant people. (19)

Note: According to John MacArthur's use of the term grounds of life, David was both an adulterer and a murderer for at least a year, but according to him, during that time, David was a believer with saving faith! (John MacArthur is no different from all the other "eternal security" teachers, always trying to get the Scriptures to allow wicked behavior in the life of a believer.)

So if you know a person who claims to be a Christian and lives as holy as David in that period, then (according to John MacArthur) such a person must have 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 former life, and only this will show that he was never truly saved. On the contrary, the Bible presents 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 while he continues in these sins without repentance (Rev. 21:8; 1 John 3:15; 1 Cor. 6:9,10; etc.).

[By the way, teachers of the "saved once-saved forever" theory seem to be reading the Scriptures to validate their sinful preaching of eternal security, saying things like the above about Lot. It cannot be proven 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 such 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, while living in Sodom, was righteous (2 Pet. 2:8).]

A generalization of MacArthur's idea of ​​saving faith and holiness
As a summary, John MacArthur's false teaching on saving faith and holiness proclaims the following:
A true Christian who has saving faith may commit occasional acts 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 the sins listed in 1 Cor. 6:9,10, only to almost return to their old life and still have saving faith. Here is the passage and the list, in case the reader is unfamiliar 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 malakia, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor blasphemers, nor predators - will inherit the Kingdom of God.
No sin, even the most heinous one, including child molestation, rape, murder, homosexuality, etc. will never prevent a previously saved person from entering heaven. (This is the same notion declared by Hodge, Ryrie, and Stanley.)
Sin works for the good of the Christian!
A person who does not have saving faith is one whose essence of character is that he practices them [sins] continuously and without repentance ... (20).

Therefore, any behavior that is even slightly better than continuous and unrepentant sinfulness can describe a person who has saving faith and goes to heaven on a saved-once-saved-forever basis, even though he may be living in a multitude. sins listed in 1 Cor. 6:9,10.

Matthew 7:20-29
One of the most common responses from "saved once, saved forever" proponents is "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 showed the fruits of redemption. The main passage quoted by such "once saved" people, especially John MacArthur and other Calvinists, is from Mt. 7:23. Let's go back to Matt. 7:20-29 to better understand the context:

Matt. 7:20 Therefore by their fruits you shall know them.

In this verse, Jesus said that we can recognize (or identify) a person by his fruits. 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 verses further, we learn that such fruit is not (1) prophecy in the name of Christ; (2) not casting out spirits in the name of Christ, or (3) not performing miracles. (This will be proven later in more detail.)

Who will enter the kingdom of heaven
Matt. 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. Regardless of 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 claim Jesus as their Lord.

Also, MF. 7:21 is a particularly important verse, for it speaks of who will eventually enter the kingdom of heaven. Jesus, who also gave us the promises of Jn. 3:16, here explicitly said:
"... but doing 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 most important truth about final salvation—the actual entrance 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 has eternal life; and I will raise him up at 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 sacrament believer has a continuous tense in Greek.) Obedience and good works are inextricably linked to saving faith in Jesus. Notice how obvious this is from the following verse:
And those who have done good will go out to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment. (John 5:29).

To those who by perseverance in doing good seek glory, honor, and immortality, eternal life (Rom. 2:7).

What good is it, my brethren, if someone says that he has faith, but does not have works? can this faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and does not have food for the day, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, keep warm and eat,” but does not give them the necessities of the body: what is the use? So faith, if it does not have works, is dead in itself (John 2:14-17).
Remembering unceasingly your work of faith and work of love and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ before our God and Father (1 Thessalonians 1:3).
Through whom we have received grace and apostleship, that in His name we may bring all nations under the faith (Rom. 1:5).
So real, true saving faith in Jesus will always coexist with obedience and good works.

Matt. 7:22,23 Many will say to Me in that day, Lord! God! Have we not prophesied in Your name? and did they not cast out demons in your name? and did not many miracles work 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 and refers to a personal relationship with Jesus (or salvation).How surprised we really must be when we read a passage from Mt. 7, which shows that religious people who have never been saved can perform miracles, cast out demons, and prophesy accurately, and what do other scriptures clearly prove?

Unsaved people can give a self-fulfilling prophecy
In addition, the unsaved can prophesy and make the prophecy come true:
If a prophet or a dreamer rises up among you and presents you with a sign or a miracle, and the sign or miracle that he told you about comes true, and says, moreover, “Let us go after other gods, which you do not know, and we will serve them,” - then do not listen to the words of this prophet, or this dreamer; for by this the Lord your God tempts you, 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 know nothing, and you will not think that it is better for us that one person should die for the people than that the whole nation should perish. This he did not say of himself, but being the high priest that year, he foretold that Jesus would die for the people (John 11:49-51).

Unsaved people and demons canperform great miracles
Perhaps the most amazing fact is that unsaved people can perform great miracles! The Magi at the Pharaoh's trial performed them, as the false prophet will do on behalf of the Antichrist:

Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh and did as the Lord commanded. And Aaron threw his staff before Pharaoh and before his servants, and it became a serpent. And Pharaoh called wise men and sorcerers; and these magicians of Egypt did the same with their charms: each of them threw down his rod, and they became snakes, 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 from heaven to earth before people. (Rev. 13:13).
And the beast was seized, and with him the false prophet, who worked miracles before him, with which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and worshiped his image: both were thrown alive into the lake of fire, burning with brimstone (Rev. 19:20).
Even demons can perform miracles:
These are demonic spirits that work signs; they go out to the kings of the earth of the whole universe in order to gather them for battle on that great day of God Almighty. (Rev. 16:14).

An unsaved person can cast out demons
An unsaved person can even cast out demons! Besides MF. 7:22 this same truth is shown elsewhere:
And if I cast out demons by the power of Beelzebub, by whom do your sons cast 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 Skeva. But the evil spirit answered and said: I know Jesus, and I know Paul, but who are you? (Acts 19:13-15).

Therefore, if we never read Matt. 7:22,23 we would still know that according to Scripture, some religious and unsaved people can correctly prophesy, perform miracles, and even cast out demons. Also, clergy sometimes do similar things, but still go to the lake of fire (Rev. 21:8). Some believe that Jesus in Matt. 7:22,23 was talking about occultists. (On the other hand, in the book of Acts we also see that true Christians did the same thing: prophesied correctly, 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
Key in Matt. 7:20-24 is definitely verse 23! Those spoken of there were hardened wicked (New International Version of the Bible) or committed iniquity (KJV) or practiced iniquity (New American Standard Bible), even though at the same time they were casting out demons performed miracles and prophesied in the name of the Lord! Their constant acts of lawlessness is the fruit by which Jesus says in verse 20 we can determine a person's spiritual status. Remember also the verses that confirm this:

The children of God and the children of the devil are recognized thus: everyone who does not do what is right is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother (1 John 3:10).
Children! let no one deceive you. Whoever does what is right is righteous, just as He is righteous. Whoever commits sin is from the devil, because the devil sinned first (1 John 3:7,8).

The Lord's apostles taught that we can tell the children of the devil from the children of God by their current behavior, that is, by what they do, what they don't do, or by their love. This is the true Christian teaching, although, in our dark times, it is often rejected and despised.

Also, the same Greek word translated "iniquity" in Matt. 7:23 is found in other passages of Scripture. It is translated in English as "wickedness", i.e. "sinfulness":because of the increase of iniquity, the love of many will grow cold (Mt. 24:12).

Who gave Himself for us, to deliver us from all iniquity, and to purify for Himself a special people, zealous for good works (Titus 2:14).

Those who do iniquity at the present time are not Christians
Those who do iniquity at the present time are not Christians. Such people can be divided into two types: (1) those who have never been saved (or have always been unbelievers) and (2) those who were once saved and subsequently lost their salvation. One of many examples is those who have returned to their sin as a dog returns to his vomit (2 Pet. 2:20-22). In other words, those who do iniquity in Matt. 7:23, in general, they committed sin, and yet they also performed religious deeds in the name of Christ: they performed miracles, cast out demons, prophesied. Awesome!

Final words of Jesus
Jesus taught as having authority:
So whoever hears these words of mine and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock; and the rain fell, and the rivers flooded, and the winds blew, and rushed against that house, and it did not fall, because it was founded on a stone. And whoever hears these words of Mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on sand; and the rain came down, and the rivers flooded, and the winds blew, and fell upon 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 scribes and Pharisees. (Matthew 7:24-29).

Notice that in the closing words of the Lord from this key passage, He simply said that there are only two types of people: (1) The prudent ones who hear these words of Mine and do them and (2) The foolish ones who hear these words of Mine and do not fulfills them. Those who do iniquity (in Matt. 7:23) belonged to the last group, not keeping the words of Jesus. Therefore, Jesus never knew them. Such religious people have never shown evidence of their salvation that accompanies the true transformation that so many others had, yet returned to their old lives in sin and selfishness, like all those who backslide (1 Tim. 4:1). ), suffered shipwreck in the faith (1 Tim. 1:19,20), fell away from grace (Gal. 5:2,4), etc., about whom, as about many like them, neither the Lord His apostles never said they were never originally saved. Also, 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 teaching on saving faith. In fact, they don't know what he teaches about sin in the life of a true believer, as he sometimes (and at the same time contradictoryly) says that if a person returns to iniquity after turning to God, then he has never really been saved. . However, on other occasions when the same question is raised, he states that saints sometimes go astray, committing grave sins while remaining saved, which is a typical Calvinist belief.
Like other teachers of the "saved once, saved forever" theory, the revered John MacArthur contradicts himself. Notice, moreover, what information this man has published in print about sin. In his commentary on 1 Cor. 6:9, he wrote:
While believers can and do commit these sins, they are not the foundation of their lives. (21)

Let me refresh your memory regarding 1 Cor. 6:9, since this author writes about the sins given 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 malakias, nor sodomists.

Therefore, according to John MacArthur, a true believer (or Christian) with saving faith can commit these sins and remain saved without repentance! Why doesn't he here say that if this happens, then this sin-practicing Christian was never originally saved, as he teaches on other occasions? In essence, this quote clearly shows that MacArthur is actually offering a disguised license to debauchery!

If they completely returned to their former life
Let me reiterate a quote from John MacArthur's study Bible. This quote refers to what is said in 1 Cor. 6:11:
Some who followed these patterns of sinful living fell back into those old sins and needed to be reminded that if they returned to their former life completely, they would not inherit eternal salvation, because such a lifestyle indicates that they have never been saved. (22)

Did you notice the contradiction in his statement? He mentioned some who followed [past tense] such patterns of sinful living. For this reason, his statement implies freedom from the bondage of sin only for a time! According to the Bible, this is only due to contact with the blood of Jesus, which occurs at the moment of receiving true salvation. Among others, another passage of Scripture is obvious - Rev. 1:5:
Him who loved us and washed us from our sins with His own blood.

The claim that one can be freed from sin without contact with the blood of Christ at the moment of salvation is heresy in itself. Also, according to John MacArthur, such people would have to go back to their original lives 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 committed before they were born again), then according to John MacArthur's version of grace and saving faith with salvation in such active Christians everything is in order, and they demonstrate that they were saved all the time while doing these wicked deeds. In addition, until they have completely returned to their former life, they demonstrate their salvation by simultaneously being in exactly the same sins that drag others to hell.

First, John MacArthur talks about enduring to the end on the path of righteousness and holiness, and then he turns around and declares that a person remains saved even while he commits the sins given 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 some people who once showed evidence of saving grace and then deserted, bearing the stigma of "never originally saved," and others like them, are not both like King David, who committed adultery and murder, and like 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 one who has completely and completely lost saving faith.

Study Bibles or Indoctrination Bibles?
The so-called Study Bibles that are sold in so-called Christian bookstores are not true study Bibles, as they contain much more than just maps, diagrams, or information about weights, units of measurement, etc. Many of their notes (interpretations), such as John MacArthur's that you just read, are actually dangerous, false teachings taught by teachers of the "saved once, saved forever" theory. They should be called more precisely: Bibles for indoctrination of people's minds, because that is what they often do. Even worse, when the lies of the "saved once, saved forever" theory are taught in these study Bibles, they actually infect the perfectly pure Bible with this lie, which is contained next to Divine truth.

Thus, if a person takes the position of a publisher and believes in the "saved once, saved forever" doctrine, like John MacArthur, this deadly theological lie will slip into their so-called study Bible, bringing eternal danger to anyone who mistakenly believes that these kinds of notes and comments are useful. to understand the text. (Other dangerously deceptive so-called study Bibles besides the John MacArthur Bible are the Ryrie Study Bible, the Scofield Annotated Bible, the New Geneva Study Bible, and Holman's Christian Standard Bible, to name but 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 “once saved, forever saved” doctrine are also teaching this erroneous teaching of John MacArthur about sin as a way of life, to the detriment of their followers, and they, like John MacArthur, are condemned by the text of Jude 3, 4.) You may have heard John MacArthur and others use this term.

Salvation can be lost because of sin alone!
In the years that I have obeyed the command to fight for the faith against the “saved once, saved forever” doctrine (Jude 3:4), I have met some people who claim to reject the “once saved, forever saved” doctrine, 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 very difficult to achieve. One person even stated that before you lose your salvation, you must tell God that you are rejecting Him. Is there any biblical evidence for these claims? Is there any basis for them? Or does Scripture say that salvation can be lost after a single act of a certain sin? (Please remember that all sins have varying degrees of severity: some lead to [spiritual] death, while others do not, according to 1 John 5:16,17.)

How many times must a righteous person fall into sexual immorality, drunkenness, theft, etc. to lose your salvation? Should it become a way of life or a continuous sin? Is it necessary, as some argue, to start practicing sin in order to become unsaved or to demonstrate a complete lack of original salvation? Let's look at the word of God.

hard facts
Returning to an important and already mentioned passage of Scripture, let us recall once again how one of the original teachers of grace declared:
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 malakia, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor predators - will inherit the Kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9,10).

According to the passage of Scripture quoted above, any person who falls under this description will not inherit the Kingdom of God. So how difficult is it, by the biblical definition, to become an adulterer, or any of that list? Must a person practice adultery before, by the biblical definition, he becomes an adulterer? Should it become a way of life? Here are the facts:

If anyone commits adultery with a married wife, if anyone commits adultery with his neighbor's wife, let both the adulterer and the adulteress be put to death. (Lev. 20:10)
As has just been shown, the definition of the word adulterer is consistent with the Word of God - it is one who commits adultery. Therefore, any person who commits one or more acts of adultery is an adulterer. The same can be said by analogy for the other bold words in 1 Cor. 6:9,10. Their definition is one who performs a certain act, whether it be theft, drunkenness, idolatry, or the like. To become a fornicator, an idolater, an adulterer, a malakier, a sodomy, a thief, a covetous man, a drunkard, a blasphemer, or a predator from Cor. 6:9,10 you do not need to do these deeds 5, 16 or 113 times, or start leading a dissolute lifestyle. Based on the above example with the word "adulter" this becomes crystal clear.

It doesn't have to be a constant sin to do this.
or lead a sinful life
Other passages of Scripture reveal the same powerful truth, refuting the notion that continuous sin or sin as a lifestyle is the only way to lose salvation (or to demonstrate that a person has never really been 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; (Num. 35:16)
Besides, a single act of killing makes a person a murderer. (Including suicides, who are self-murderers.)

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):
The timid and the unfaithful, and the filthy, and the murderers, and the fornicators, and the sorcerers, and the idolaters, and all the liars, will have their fate in the lake burning with fire and brimstone. This is the second death. (Rev. 21:8)

Some may object that in the text of Rev. 21:8 refers only to unbelieving people, but the words "fearful and unfaithful" include all apostate Christians in this list. The sin of unfaithfulness can only be sinned by a person who was once faithful to God.

Denying Jesus
The Lord Jesus told the already saved people the following:
but whoever denies me before men, I will also deny him 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 said to them, You will all be offended because of Me this night, for it is written, I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered; after my resurrection I will go before you into Galilee. Peter answered Him, “If everyone is offended about You, I will never be offended. Jesus said to him, “Truly, I say to you, this very night, before the cock crows, you will deny me three times. Peter says to him, Even though it behooves me to die with you, I will not deny you. All the students said the same. (Matthew 26:31-35)

So how difficult was it for Peter and the other sheep to deny Jesus and be tempted? This turned out to be not very difficult and soon happened, as it was written:
Peter was sitting outside in the yard. And a servant girl came up to him and said, You were also with Jesus the Galilean. But he denied before everyone, saying: I do not know what you are talking about. And as he was going out of the gate, another saw him, and she said to those who were there, This one was also with Jesus of Nazareth. And he again denied with an oath that he did not know This Man. After a while, those who were standing there came up and said to Peter, “Surely you are one of them, for your speech also reproves you.” Then he began to swear and swear that he did not know This Man. And suddenly a rooster 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. (Matthew 26:69-75)

Just like Peter, a true Christian can deny Jesus (or be tempted). This is what the apostle Peter did, denying that he was with or knew Jesus. He didn't have to say to God, "I don't want to know You," and he didn't have to do it all the time in that lifestyle. These words of Peter were enough for Jesus to deny him! If Jesus disowns you, then you can no longer be His sheep, just like other unsaved people. Christians are described as God's property: 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 from the tree of "the knowledge of good and evil" he would die (Gen. 2:17). This is exactly what happened in one single act of sin. This was not their usual practice or way of life, it was just one single act of sin that brought both Adam and Eve to their spiritual death.

David did iniquity
Shockingly, even people who are extremely strong in faith can subsequently err to the point of committing sin, which leads to death. That's what David did. His manifest sins were one act of adultery and one act of murder, which would have excluded him from the Kingdom of God and brought him into the lake of fire (1 Cor. 6:9,10; Rev. 21:8). For at least 9 months, he was, by definition of the Bible, an adulterer and murderer due to his exceptional acts of adultery and murder.
Nathan said to David:
Why did you neglect the word of the Lord, doing evil in His sight? You struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword; you took his wife for your wife, and you killed him with the sword of the Ammonites; (2 Sam. 12:9)

Note that David did evil. You may 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 along with this and the next passage, we have even stronger evidence that David lost his salvation during that dark time of his life.

David spiritually died when he sinned
When I tell the righteous that he will live, and he will rely on his righteousness and commit a lie, then all his righteous deeds will not be remembered, and he will die from his own injustice, which he did. (Ezekiel 33:13)
Those who do untruth, as David did, spiritually die, according to what has been said above. The following fragment is even stronger evidence that David lost his salvation for a while:
And the righteous, if he departs from his righteousness and does unrighteousness, will do all the abominations that the lawless one does, will he live? All his good deeds, which he did, will not be remembered; for his iniquity, which he does, and for his sins, in which he is a sinner, he will die. (Ezekiel 18:24)
When the righteous departed from his righteousness and began to do iniquity, he would die for it. (Ezekiel 33:18)
If the righteous departs from his righteousness and commits iniquity and dies for it, 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 twist 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 the teacher of the theory of "eternal security", even though he may seem to deny the doctrine of "eternal security".
Note: Severe warnings Ezek. 18:24,26; 33:13,18 are not purely hypothetical, as some claim, for they came true to David.

Even David knew that during that period of time he was doing iniquity and therefore was spiritually dead because of his sin:
Have mercy on me, O God, according to Thy great mercy, and according to the multitude of Thy mercies, blot out my iniquities. Wash me many times from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin, for I recognize my iniquities, and my sin is always before me. You, You alone, I have sinned and done evil in Your sight, so that You are righteous in Your judgment and pure in Your judgment. (Ps. 50:3-6)
Also, some like to misuse Ps. 50 to state that David only lost the joy of his salvation. They somehow miss the fact 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 by which, according to Jesus, the repentant tax collector was saved and was justified:
The publican, standing afar off, did not even dare to raise his eyes to heaven; but, striking his 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 humbled, 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 puts his hand on the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God (Luke 9:62, New American Standard Bible, Russian Synodal Translation)
Another translation says:
But Jesus told him, no one who puts his hand on the plow and looks back is qualified 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 brimstone. 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 the text of 1 Jn. 2:15. The Lord attaches saving significance to Christian fidelity (Matt. 10:37-39; Luke 14:26,33). James also says:
Adulterers 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 to God (James 4:4).

X Christians who have decided to become friends with the world become enemies of God again, i.e. as they were before they were saved. It's like committing spiritual adultery. Think of Lot's wife who looked back and perished (Gen. 19:26). Jesus remembered her:
Remember Lot's wife. Whoever saves his soul will destroy it, and whoever destroys it will revive it (Luke 17:32, 33)

Your words
People find it hard to believe that certain words can send a person into hellfire, but that's what Jesus taught:
But I tell you that everyone who is angry with his brother in vain is subject to judgment; whoever says to his brother: “cancer”, is subject to the Sanhedrin; and whoever says: "insane", is subject to hell fire. (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:
I tell you that for every idle word that people speak, 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 denied Jesus only 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 this because they said, “He has an unclean spirit.” (Mark 3:29,30).
Note that the sin that entails eternal damnation is committed through words. It also follows from what Hebrews says that some of the people it addresses committed eternal sin that could not be remedied 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 age to come, and fallen away, to renew again with repentance, when they again crucify the Son of God within 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 expose Him to public shame. A raging fire awaited them even though they had been previously sanctified by 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 spiritual personality could be turned into an idolater by committing one single sin:
Do not be idolaters like some of them, of 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 after committing idolatry once, they became idolaters. And he knew 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 "beast" stigma, many will accept it because of the heavy pressure. Saints who succumb to this compulsion will lose their salvation through a single act of defiance:
And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice: Whoever worships the beast and his image, and receives the mark on his forehead or on his hand, he will drink the wine of the wrath of God, whole wine, prepared in the cup of His wrath, and will be tormented in the fire and sulfur before the holy angels and before the Lamb; and the smoke of their torment will ascend forever and ever, and they will have no rest, day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and who receive the mark of his name. (Rev. 14:9-12)

Loyalty 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 will have to endure. Behold, the devil will cast from among you into prison to tempt you, and you will have tribulation for ten days. Be faithful unto 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 fooled
There are many ways for a Christian to forfeit his salvation. Sometimes just one act of sin can do it, while other times it doesn't happen as suddenly as when it gets warm (Rev. 3:15, 16). Moreover, a person does not even need to sin 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 it is to all those deceived by those who "turned grace into debauchery," teaching that David never lost his salvation, or that one act of sin, such as adultery, suicide, or salvation. Jude, on the other hand, defined all who turn grace into an occasion for debauchery as ungodly (Jude 3:4), sowing strife, having no spirit (verse 19), and to whom the gloom of darkness is kept for ever (verse 13).

False teachers who declare only a sinful lifestyle to be spiritually dangerous not only ignore or distort the above 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 who preach their unbiblical version of grace, if a previously saved person commits occasional (occasional) acts of adultery, idolatry, sodomy, theft, covetousness, drunkenness, abuse, fraud, he remains saved. This is a terrible and spiritually dangerous distortion of the image of a real Christian, described in the Bible. Please note that it did not take the apostle Paul much 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 sinful way of life, is not really a friend to immoral people. On the contrary, he puts their souls in danger of being attacked by Satan, deceiving them with his false theory of "eternal security" and his so-called grace or gospel. He shows no mercy or love in preaching his own untruth and catering to heretics like himself. It is a love and vital message for them to witness that they must turn from such 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 rascal can still go to heaven, yet Jesus stated crystal clear that rascals will instead go out into the resurrection of judgment and be thrown into a fiery furnace:
And those who have done good will go out to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment. (John 5:29)
The Son of Man will send His angels, and they will gather from His Kingdom all stumbling blocks and those who do iniquity, and cast them into a fiery furnace; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 13:41,42)

Both paths are equally destructive.
The difference between "eternal security" teachers who brazenly allow a Christian to commit random acts of sin such as those quoted in 1 Cor. 6:9,10 and at the same time remain 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 mortal, they lure people into the net of satanic delusion. If you are a real Christian, run from such a community and from the so-called "pastor" no matter how convenient it may be to stay there. Do not endanger 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 sheepskin. Do not share his evil work (2 John 10:11).

Grace of God
Clearly, the early Christians could tell who were believers and who were unbelievers:
Meanwhile, those who were scattered because of the persecution after Stephen went as far as Phenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, preaching the word to no one but the Jews. And there were some of them Cyprians and Cyreneans, who, having come to Antioch, spoke to the Greeks, proclaiming the Lord Jesus. And the hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number, believing, turned to the Lord. A rumor about this reached the church of Jerusalem, and Barnabas was instructed 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 to other people of their possession of saving grace. It will logically follow true revival, as 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 personality, goes unnoticed? Hardly! As throughout 1 John, the above passages state that faithfully saved people can be found. This same truth is supported by many other passages of Scripture, contrary to what the proponents of the theories of the CAOS teach, while wanting to be believed! To confuse the matter, they sometimes say that only God can see what is in the heart. God, of course, sees what people cannot see, but many other passages of Scripture teach that even a person can distinguish a truly saved person from one who is not, as has already been shown. In addition, there is more evidence for this assertion:

1. Epenet was "the firstfruits of Achaia for Christ" (Rom. 16:5). The only way Paul could have known this was when he had the visible evidence of his salvation before him. Evidently, Paul knew who was and who was not saved by his preaching of the gospel. The same can be said about the family of Stephen, who is also called the firstfruits of Achaia (1 Cor. 16:15).

2. Paul knew that Apelles had been "tested" and established in Christ (Rom. 16:10). Again, Paul knew that this man was in Christ.

3. Paul wrote to the saints in Rome: “Greet Narcissus from the household—those who are in the Lord” (Rom. 16:11). It is clear that Paul believed that people in the household of Narcissus who were in the Lord could be discovered and distinguished from others in the same family 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 have crucified the flesh with its passions and lusts.

5. Genuine "saints, and 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 would know whom to appoint to these high ecclesiastical positions. In verse 6, Paul wrote the following:
He must not be one of the newly converted, lest he become proud and fall under condemnation with the devil.
It is clear that Timothy could tell who was a convert. Thus, this text implies that Timothy could also know exactly when a person is saved.

7. Paul wrote a common commandment for all Christians: “Do not bow under another's yoke with unbelievers” (2 Corinthians 6:14). Christians here are obviously different from unbelievers.

8. Paul wrote that we should do good to all people, “but especially to those who are by faith” (Gal. 6:10). This would be impossible if we could not distinguish between a true 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 a 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 the faith has never really been saved before. As has just been proven, the Bible teaches that there is visible evidence of salvation for other people. Thus, we can clearly know whether a person was originally saved or not, despite the fact that this is categorically excluded in Calvinism:
God's decree of election, according to which people are chosen to 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 control criteria of the apostle John cited above, we also have the following:
Persecution for a Godly Life:
Remember the word I said to you: A servant is not greater than his master. If I was persecuted, you will be persecuted; if they kept my word, they will keep yours (John 15:20).
And all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted (2 Tim. 3:12).
Evil Concern:
And righteous Lot, weary of dealing among violently depraved people, he delivered (for this righteous man, living among them, daily tormented in a righteous soul, seeing and hearing lawless deeds) (2 Pet. 2:7,8).
Shame for a past sinful life:
What kind of fruit did you have then? Such deeds as 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 hear the word of God and do it (Luke 8:21).
What good is it, my brethren, if someone says that he has faith, but does not have 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 to you not what we preached to you, let it be anathema. As we said before, so I say it again: whoever preaches to you other than what you received, let him be anathema (Gal. 1:8,9).
I remind you, brethren, of the gospel which I proclaimed to you, which you have accepted, in which you have been established, by which you are being saved, if you retain what was given as I proclaimed to you, unless you believe in vain. For I first taught you what 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 the Scriptures (1 Cor. 15:1-4).
Separation from the world:
Why do they marvel that you do not participate in the same debauchery with them, and curse you (1 Pet. 4:4).
Therefore, go out from among them and separate yourself, says the Lord, and do not touch the unclean; and I will receive you. And I will be your Father, 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 then do you say, you will be made free? Jesus answered them: Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin. But the slave does not stay in the house forever; the son abides forever. Therefore, if the Son sets you free, you will be truly free” (John 8:32-36).
Don't you know that to whom you give yourself as a slave for obedience, you are also the slaves to whom you obey, or slaves of sin unto death, or obedience to righteousness? Thanks be to God that you, having previously been slaves of sin, have become obedient from the heart to that image of teaching to which you have given yourself over. Having been freed from sin, you have become slaves of 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. Besides, going to "church," distributing saving literature, and even preaching is not such a witness either.

Parable of the Sower
In the Parable of the Sower, the Lord mentions four types of people who hear the Word of God. It is stated that only the first type of people will never be saved! Apart from the clear statement about this in Lk. 8:12, we see that no other plant fell away from the seed (the Word of God), unlike all the other three types, which became saved, at least for a while (Luke 8:5-8). Those people who are described in Lk. 8:12, were never actually saved.

(NOTE: However, MacArthur and preachers like him deliberately do not use this verse to support their "never been saved" theory because of the following verse, Luke 8:13, which clearly refutes the SNES theory. We know that those described in verse 13 people had an experience of true salvation, as it clearly speaks of how a particular plant sprouted and had life for a while and then perished due to persecution for the sake of righteousness, 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 fall under the definition of the proponents of the theory of AHRS, who claim that the backsliders have never before had real salvation. If you think carefully about the content of both these verses, their error will become obvious:

And what fell along the way is the essence of those who hear, to whom the devil then comes and takes the word out of their hearts, so that they would not believe and be saved. And those who fell on the stone are those who, when they hear the word, receive it with joy, but who have no root, and believe for a time, but fall away in the time of temptation. (Luke 8:12,13).
The apostle Paul also certainly could not have been a teacher of HCSS like John MacArthur. Thus, he did not think that his co-workers Imenei and Alexander had never been saved before because their faith in Jesus had been shipwrecked, i.e. turned out to be only temporary, as some representatives of the theory of SOSN would say today:
Having faith and a good conscience, which some, having rejected, have been shipwrecked in faith. Such are Imenaeus and Alexander, whom I betrayed 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 Imenaeus and Alexander could also happen to Timothy, who was definitely saved. Therefore, he told him how he could avoid this fate.

How narrow is the path to life?
John MacArthur would agree that the path that leads to life is difficult (Matt. 7:14), but this is really not at all in light of how he and other POS preachers distort the Scriptures, especially through their understanding of such a concept as "sin unto death." According to them, it means that God puts to death an unrepentant Christian who may be in adultery or other similar sin, and rewards him by rapturing him with a faster path to paradise! James Kennedy, who is a Calvinist like John MacArthur, wrote quite specifically about this:

The sins of a child of God can cause him premature death in this world…. I remember one person in this church who was in the sin of adultery many years ago. 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 he was going to divorce his wife and marry another woman. I warned him and urged him to repent until he appeared before the church board, who also warned him to repent. However, he did not repent and was temporarily suspended from Communion. Finally, the membership meeting decided that, since he held his own, he should be expelled from the membership of the church. Just before this happened, God intervened in such a way that suddenly this young man died. These are just some of the countless and unlimited ways in which God can punish those who are His own but do not repent of their sins.(24)

This is the teaching of a man who is the senior pastor of a Fort Lauderdale, Florida Presbyterian Church with approximately 10,000 members. Kennedy has also written over 45 books, with his best-selling book Evangelism Blast selling more than 1.5 million copies. His voiced teachings are heard on 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. His influence is unbelievably great, and yet he is spreading spiritual poison!

These grace distorters, including Kennedy, are at odds with what they call never-before-saved. For some unknown reason, they accuse of "temporary faith" a person who once had convincing evidence of his salvation, and then contradict this view by stating that others who suddenly died physically in an unrepentant sin such as adultery or drunkenness were saved, and that it was God who put them to death, taking them to a better place - to Heaven! This teaching of theirs is nothing but a contradiction, a blatant violation of the gospel norms of holiness and a license for immorality.
Don't doubt it!

According to the theory of CASD and the theology of Calvinism, the unrepentant unfaithful spouse remains saved even though he died physically in such a spiritual state. Because God could not bring him to repentance through His discipline, He put him to death. Remember that death is beneficial to the Christian to whom these preachers refer it! Therefore, this interpretation of the concept of sin unto 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 earth, remaining unrepentant and accepted more quickly into the blissful Kingdom of God! What an incredible license for immorality is the doctrine of "the perseverance of the saints," "eternal security," or "saved once, saved forever."

Stay holy?
It also lifts the veil forever on the CACH version of Calvinism, as if it could be compatible with a holy life. This interpretation of the gospel expression "sin unto death" replaces holiness with its exact opposite. Why are these adulterous people and others like them who remain unrepentant, never considered 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?

Because SIDS theorists refuse to understand "sin unto death" as a name for spiritual death, which would contradict this theory, they trap themselves in this dilemma, i.e. the possibility of remaining an unrepentant unfaithful spouse until physical death and yet still be saved. in the end. Obviously, it remained hidden for the preachers of SOSN that God, having physically killed those people whom He once freed from Egypt because of their sins, actually sent them straight to hell, because in this way He executed His final judgment on them ( see Numbers 16:26-34).

They refuse to acknowledge this because it is to their advantage to perpetuate the teachings of the SSCH and their own church 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 the unbelievers, and keeps the angels who did not retain their dignity, but left their dwelling, in eternal chains, under darkness, for the judgment of the great day. How Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, like them who committed fornication and went after other flesh, having undergone the punishment of eternal fire, are set as an example (Jude 5-7).
God will bring them back if they are truly His people.

Their teaching is marked by repeated contradictions and shortcomings. Note another contradiction that Kennedy described:
This is the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints…. » [They] may not fall completely or completely… Which means that they may fall away partially or temporarily, but God will bring them back to Himself if they are really His people (25)

Christian adulterers?
God never returned to Himself the unrepentant adulterer in Kennedy's story, who was also a minister, allegedly marking him as His own. This teaching, which completely destroys the holy way of life of a Christian, allows one to be considered eternally saved who can behave in a sinful way, just like the carnal Christian Charles Stanley. Thus, these blind guides indirectly admit that the punishment of God does not always work in the matter of returning the apostate person to God. This is the same truth that has long been maintained by Christians who profess the believer's conditional security (Jer. 32:33; etc.).

The dual language of the Calvinists
It also confirms their misleading teaching in a cunning way. Kennedy continues to write his disgusting thoughts:
We persevere in godliness and a holy life in the service of Jesus Christ, but we will only complete this in His eternal kingdom. (26)

Kennedy speaks here in a rambling and evasive language that is characteristic of the Indians. He had just taught that the unrepentant unfaithful spouse was put to death by God and brought into the kingdom of God. Naturally, this man did not pursue godliness and a holy life in the service of Jesus Christ at all.

MacArthur Holiness Facade
The Calvinistic doctrine of the saving faith of MacArthur-Kennedy is nothing more than a license to debauchery, hidden under the guise of outward piety. Just as in the case of Kennedy, please read carefully the following words of JOHN MACARTHUR, so that you can then see the real message behind his outer facade, which has deceived a large number of people for many years:

Slaves of sin - unbelieving people - 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 Romans 6 says: God frees us not only from the punishment of sin (justification), but also from the dominion of sin (sanctification).(27)

The sincerely saved and obedient follower of the Lord Jesus will come to know divine truth and freedom from sin (verse 34). (28)
Christians enslaved to sin?

Evidently a doctrine such as the one above has created unrest in the minds of some of its followers, so John MacArthur qualifies that it is only a sinful habit. Those. it switches from one position to another,
revealing a license for debauchery, which he had already condemned earlier, which makes his teaching self-contradictory. Notice what he wrote about people he thinks are Christians:

Some Christians doubt their salvation because they probably cannot overcome a sinful or unwise habit. They most often report smoking, overeating and masturbating... They find their struggle with these sinful habits hopeless. But John does not say that the frequent occurrence of one specific sin in a person's life means that he is lost to 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 the authority of God does not care what God thinks of his habits and is obviously not a Christian. (29)

MacArthur's Hidden Definition of a Christian
John MacArthur teaches that the frequent occurrence of one particular sin does not imply that such a person is lost, even if such a person cannot be removed and freed from a sexual propensity for a sin such as masturbation. According to him, one way or another, but all this does not mean 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 has apparently deduced this explanation from his own head and does not even try to justify such a strange statement with the help of scriptural texts that contradict it, which he quotes on other occasions. He generally did not cite any support for this opinion.

Thus, according to John MacArthur, as long as you care about what God thinks about your own evil and sinful habits, from which you cannot free yourself in any way and therefore often become a victim of them, 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 cases. This explains why he also believes that the unnamed sexual liar in 1 Cor. 5, who committed “fornication such as is not heard even among the Gentiles” (1 Cor. 5:1), was a true 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 of his life as we know it:True believers sometimes commit heinous sins, as David did in 2 Sam. 11. (30)

The saving faith of John MacArthur declares that such was still a genuine believer. Since this cannot be in conflict with the SHOS theory, David did not lose his salvation by sinning in the case of Bathsheba. So nothing prevented MacArthur from writing the following on the same page as the above quote: In other words, all true believers follow Jesus (John 10:27-28).(31)

King David was still following Jesus
Thus, in one way or another, 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 while remaining in his unrepentant sins of adultery, murder, and so on. The same can be said about those Christians who are filled with painful doubts about their salvation because they probably cannot overcome their sinful or unwise habit [in particular, masturbation]. MacArthur goes on and writes more about genuine believers:

Those who have true faith will fail - and in some cases even often - but will remain a true believer, as they recognize sin as a way of life and turn to the Father for forgiveness (1 John 1:9). (32)

Another controversy
A saved person who is lost does not always acknowledge his sins and turns to the Father for forgiveness, because he has his own understanding of "sin unto death" taught by MacArthur, Kennedy and other Calvinists. John MacArthur writes about this:
Sin... can even endanger our physical life and health (1 Cor. 11:29-30). (33)

While sin does not result 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 eventually 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 clearly cannot acknowledge his sins and turn to the Father for forgiveness, although John MacArthur teaches that a genuine 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 the teaching methods he uses. If God can save a sinning Christian by putting him to physical death, then this must be reconciled in some reasonable way with following quotes MacArthur:
Those who fall away from Christ prove that they have never before been true believers (1 John 2:19). (36)
The departure of people from the truth and their exit from the church - this 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 refers the fall to the apostles, the following words:
The Greek word translated “be tempted” is the same one Jesus uses in 24:10 to describe the backsliding and spiritual betrayal that will take place in 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 be saved for 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, such as 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 Matt. 10:33 contains Jesus' warning of the possibility of apostasy, threatening the same group of individuals who later denied Jesus in Matt. 26:31.56:
And whoever denies me before men, I will also deny him before my Father in heaven.

Spiritual Renunciation of the Apostle Peter
As just mentioned, John MacArthur refers the reader to his footnote to Lk. 12:9, where he writes disgustingly:
This text describes the spiritual renunciation of Christ. This was Peter's temporary hesitation, of which he was guilty... (39)
In fact, this verse says the same as the apostle Paul 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 Lk. 12:9, 2 Tim. 2:12 (as well as the text of Matt. 10:33) is arneomai, which means:
To contradict, that is, to deny, reject, renounce, refuse. (40)

The 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 just a spiritual renunciation:
But he denied before everyone, saying: I do not know what you are saying (Matt. 26:70).
And he denied again with an oath that he did not know This Man (Mt. 26:72).
But he denied it, saying: I do not know and do not understand what you are saying. And he went out into the front yard (Mark 14:68).
He denied again. After a while, those who stood there again began to say to Peter: You are definitely 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 one of His disciples? He denied and said no (John 18:25).
Peter denied again; and immediately the rooster crowed (John 18:27).
How could John MacArthur miss these facts? He claims to have studied the Holy Scriptures for an impressive thirty years, thirty hours a week. And he considers all these texts as evidence of Peter's "temporal hesitation", which he expressed in his footnote to the text of Lk. 12:9:

Temporal fluctuation?
Notice the part of MacArthur's expression where he says that Peter was only guilty of a temporary fluctuation, so that he denied only in soul, when in reality he was not. Why? No doubt he followed his favorite "saved once, saved forever" theory. Notice, too, how MacArthur tries to downplay Peter's deadly denial by calling it a wobble.

Why does he consider it a temporary fluctuation when Jesus called it a renunciation? Such a denial means that the results of man's denial of Jesus and Jesus' denial of man must be consistent. All of this must mean that the true renunciation that Jesus spoke of was applicable to the apostles. However, John MacArthur wants us all to believe the exact opposite of this truth. Contrary to the true meaning of this concept in Scripture, John MacArthur apparently shows the same devotion to his desire to defend the "saved once, saved forever" doctrine.

The truth is that the apostle Peter remained in his denial of the Lord and lost his salvation until he repented and thus brought him back. Moreover, Peter did this without committing the sin “out of habit” or as a “way of life” as John MacArthur insists elsewhere! Instead of violating this biblical truth, it is much safer for our spiritual life to accept it and walk in the light of it and others associated with it, eternal facts, which testify that a real Christian can lose his salvation, and this can happen quite quickly, as has already been shown above.

What does complete or final apostasy mean?
As with Kennedy, John MacArthur's notion of sin unto death contradicts what he teaches elsewhere. Of course, those people who committed sin unto death were also guilty of complete and final apostasy, although they were subsequently brought 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 SOS.

Faith and Holiness According to MacArthur
Therefore, the sum of all the above evidence forces us to conclude that the teachings of John MacArthur (as well as Kennedy and all other preachers of the theory of HOSH) 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 acknowledges happened to Adam and Eve. (41) His oft-hidden definition of a true believer was clothed by him in a false garb 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 the theory of HRH and nothing else. For this reason, they are unable to teach the true biblical message of holiness that they claim, because their understanding of saving faith will never allow it. So they try to manipulate a certain part of Scripture and avoid others in order to force it to accept what it actually denies.

True saving faith
What should be the saving faith that is necessary in order to actually enter the Kingdom of God? It must be that kind of faith in Jesus Christ that includes repentance as an expression of aversion to sin. More precisely, true faith in Jesus Christ is obeying Him for the purpose of fulfilling His Word in a renewed and holy life. At the same time, this same faith that brings instant salvation can later be destroyed by false doctrine (2 Tim. 2:18), suffer shipwreck (1 Tim. 1:19,20), cease to exist (Luke 8:13) and etc., despite the fact that earlier it brought a person eternal life and liberation from sins. Therefore, the true Christian must remain awake in his personal responsibility for the possession of eternal salvation, because he is still in danger of going to hell, like many who once had salvation.

A sin committed after salvation continues to be poisonous for a Christian, so that it may well cause him spiritual death in the future, i.e. deprive him of his salvation, according to the true doctrine of grace (Rom. 8:13; cf. Luke 15:24,32; Jas. 1:14,15; Gal. 5:19-21; 6:8,9) . He can do him no good, no matter how much John MacArthur would like us to believe. It is entirely possible to cleanse your heart with faith in Jesus Christ (Acts 15:9; cf. 1 Tim. 1:5,6), but later find yourself defiled by sin again and return to your old life of sin (2 Pet. 2:20-22). ). [For a long list of possible spiritual tragedies, see our book The Believer's Conditional Security, p. 632]. To share eternity with Christ and enter the Kingdom of God, a Christian must endure in faith and repentance to the end of his life (Heb. 3:14; Matt. 10:22; Rev. 2:10,11). There is no compulsion in living with God regarding salvation.

Don't be deceived by John MacArthur or any other teacher (including your shepherd) who dares to say against this belief that not even the occasional act of adultery or drunkenness in a Christian's life can deprive them of their salvation. In this matter, your immortal souls are under serious threat.

The fallacy of teachers of "eternal security" has been proven
The following definition, based on the teachings of "eternal security" preachers such as John MacArthur and D. James Kennedy, is no exception:
Today's popular teachers of the "eternal security" theory avoid one part of Scripture and distort another with the criminal purpose of deceiving overly gullible people that sinful behavior in a Christian's life, no matter how serious, cannot exclude him from the Kingdom. God's, because he was once saved.

Such prowling wolves in sheep's clothing deceive many people into hell, while they themselves often become financially prosperous, promising their listeners false salvation in the presence of their sins such as those given in the text of 1 Cor. 6:9,10, disguised as their distorted version of the grace and infinite merit of Christ. This grace is clearly described in the book of Jude (Jude 3:4) as an occasion for debauchery, and for this reason must be rejected by Christians for the sake of the salvation of their immortal souls.

Notes
(1) For information on how to obtain a copy of our book The Believer's Conditional Safety, please visit http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/whatsnew.htm ", publishing house "Titul-Verlag" (Germany), 2003.
(2) See our pamphlet titled The Gospel According to Charles Stanley, available from Evangelical Outreach, PO Box 265, Washington, PA 15301.
(3) Many do not realize that John MacArthur, just as Ryrie and Hodge teach, believes that salvation can continue without repentance cursing the sinful soul after receiving regeneration. Their main difference is the need for repentance 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 argue that the state of salvation can be maintained in the presence of "accidental" actions of unrepentant sins such as adultery, murder, etc. By the way, they all teach this like the scene of David-Bathsheba-Uriah, said in the text of 1 Cor. 5:1-5, Peter's threefold denial, etc.
(4) MacArthur Study Bible ((Word Publication, 1997), p. 1969, comments on 1 John 3:8.
(5) John MacArthur, Jr., God: Standing Face to Face with His Majesty (Conqueror Books, 1993), pages 47,48.
(6) Ibid., p. 48.
(7) Ibid.
(8) Ibid., p. 119
(9) MacArthur Study Bible (Word Publication, 1997), pp. 1927, comments on James 1:15.
(10) John MacArthur, Jr., God: Being Face to Face with His Majesty, p. 118.
(11) Ibid., p. 119, italics him.
(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.
(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 have gone astray, shipwrecked in faith, fallen away, and so on. However, none of the early Christians said of such people that they were never saved from the beginning! In addition, MacArthur quotes from Jn. 10:28,29 as an argument in support of the "eternal security" theory. Hence, he teaches the doctrine of "security in a state of sin" when speaking of the people he describes in 1 Cor. 6:11 as referring to Christians saved under the theory of "eternal security" based on Jn. 10:28,29. And this is all, despite the fact that they are in such sins as 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, comments on Gal. 5:21.
(21) Ibid., p. 1736.
(22) Ibid., p. 1736.
(23) The 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 editions of the Study Bible, which adhere to the theory of SACH, should be avoided at all costs.
(24) D. James Kennedy, Can the 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 (original parentheses).
(26) D. James Kennedy, Can the 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 a Doubt (Victory 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, comments on Jas. 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 person (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 in 1 Cor. 5 was never saved from the beginning due to his ongoing sexual sin? Furthermore, John MacArthur says that the judgment regarding this unnamed sexually immoral man in 1 Cor. 5:5 was about physical death. However, analyzing the text of 2 Cor. 2:6,7, he states that this man was still physically alive after this judgment because, because of his repentance, the time had come to restore him. John MacArthur, like other Calvinists, has a controversial theology.
(36) Ibid., p. 1439, comments on 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 of the truth of their salvation, conversion, or redemption, since they clearly denied that Jesus is the Christ (1 John 2:22). Therefore, quoting this verse as an endorsement of the DOSH theory that an apostate was never truly saved from the beginning is a gross abuse of Scripture, and more specifically, ignoring the contrary evidence in the Bible that other apostates had a true experience of salvation along with all of his signs, but 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 Lk. 12:9.
(40) Strong's Symphony, Greek Dictionary, Number 720.
(41) MacArthur Study Bible, pages 19 and 20, comments on Gen. 2:17; 3:4.5.

John MacArthur

Interpretation of the books of the New Testament of James

Dedicated to Tom Pennington with gratitude for his guidance in the field of ministry in the Church of Grace to the Nations and faithful 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 belonging to a cause pleasing to God. I am continually striving to develop a relationship with the Lord in order to gain a deeper understanding of His Word so that I can interpret to His people the meaning of this or that Bible verse. Speaking in words from Neh. 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 dwells in them abundantly (Col. 3:16). Therefore, at the center of my ministry, I put helping the people of God in the knowledge of His Word - an occupation very useful for spiritual growth.

This collection of commentaries on the New Testament reflects my intention to expound Scripture. Some commentaries serve primarily linguistic purposes, others are predominantly theological, and still others are edifying. This work is a kind of interpretation, or clarification. By its structure, it is not a linguistic tool, although it touches upon aspects of linguistics when there is a need for a more accurate interpretation. It is not very theologically rich, but it discusses the main doctrines of each individual passage and their relationship to Scripture as a whole. This manual should not be considered exclusively moralistic, although, as a rule, a separate chapter is devoted to every judgment in it with a clear plan and logical conclusions. Most biblical truths are illustrated and discussed 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 accurately 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 move them to obedience and devoted service to the glory of our Lord.

Introduction

In introductory remarks to the first edition of the New Testament in Germany (1522), Martin Luther made the following oft-quoted remark regarding the Epistle of 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 other books of Scripture. Therefore, the Epistle of St. James is very small in comparison with them, since it lacks the essence of the gospel (Quoted in James H. Ropes, "The Epistle of St. James", International Commentary on the Bible, p. 106).

The great Reformationist by no means denies the power of the Epistle of James (as evidenced by his phrase: "in comparison with them"). However, his rather disparaging remarks about the book of James have been shared by many students of Scripture throughout the history of the church. In fact, because of the brevity of the epistle, its lack of deep doctrinal content, and the fact that it was addressed to Jewish Christians and its author was not one of the twelve apostles or Paul, the book of James was included in the New Testament canon by one of the latter. But this belittling of the significance of Jacob's work is superficial. Luther rarely referred to the Epistle of James, because it says little about the main doctrines of the Christian faith, of which he was an apologist. (Actually, some of Luther's hostility to James is due to the fact that Luther's Catholic opponents misinterpreted the second chapter of this Epistle to defend their postulate of "justification by works.") James is not really a doctrinal treatise, but rather should be considered purely practical guide for Christians. However, this does not detract from its value, since a righteous life and sound doctrine are inseparable from each other. Speaking of the great significance of the Epistle of James, D. Edmond Gibert writes:

...

This Epistle emphasizes the relationship between the Christian faith and the Christian way of life, severely criticizes empty creeds and severely denounces the reader for 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 ("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 wells of Old Testament wisdom as the Book of Proverbs. And the sharp denunciation of social injustice (see chapters 2, 5) leads some to call James "Amos of the New Testament." James 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 preaching of the Lord. The extent of this influence is clearly seen in the analysis of references and references to the Sermon on the Mount found in the Epistle of James.

The Epistle of James

Of all the men named James mentioned in the New Testament, only two were sufficiently famous to 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 James of Zevedeev (Acts 12:2) excludes him from the number of contenders for authorship, leaving the only possible candidate - the half-brother of Jesus. James, along with the other brothers of Jesus, initially rejected Him (see John 7:5), but later came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of Israel. Such was his zeal and piety 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 on Jacob's life, see the first chapter of this book.)

Another confirmation of the authorship of James we find in the verbal parallels between the book of James, the speech of James and the letter of James in Acts. 15. Greek verb chair-in(to rejoice) in the imperative mood in the New Testament occurs only in Jas. 1:1 and Acts. 15:23 (with the exception of 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 after" (Jas. 1:27; Acts 15:14) and "turn" in the sense of "turn to God" (James 5:19-20; Acts 15:19).

The distinctly Jewish character of the letter corresponds to the description of James in Acts. fifteen; 21. The Epistle of James contains four direct quotations from the Old Testament and over forty references to the Old Testament. In addition, James uses distinct Old Testament terminology, in the very first verse, referring to the twelve tribes that are scattered. James calls the gospel "the law of freedom" (2:12). The place where his readers gather is what he calls the "meeting", which in Greek sounds like a "synagogue" (2:2). In 4:4, he uses the image of the adulterer, so common in the Old Testament, to describe spiritual filth. The breaking 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 shown as an example to follow in prayer (5:17-18). Such "loud" Old Testament names as Abraham (2:21), Rahab (2:25) and Job (5:11) are also mentioned in his Epistle. In addition, James is the only New Testament writer to adopt an Old Testament term to describe God, "the Lord of hosts." (Paul uses this term only in the context of a quotation from Isaiah in Romans 9:29.)

Despite the particularly inspired description of James in 1:1 and the strong evidence that it was James, the blood brother of the Lord, who wrote this epistle, pseudo-theologians deny 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 evidence of the authenticity of the authorship of this Epistle.