John MacArthur - Jesus Did Not Have to Shed His Blood to Save Us!

[follower]

This is a blatant HERESY, and is AGAINST what the Bible VERY CLEARLY Teaches!

People love the false teachers, the blind leading the blind, the way that seems right to a man but leads to destruction. So it continues daily - and the forums have no power to stop promoting the false teachings many many many times more than any truth.

 

[journeymanisnothing]

Indeed further misunderstanding. I had thought your interaction with me mainly based on misunderstanding of addressee, and I for my part in #56 had simply wished to address that. My main contribution had already been given, in #39, which I am prepared to defend.

In post #39 you say Jesus' blood" means "death"". It doesn't. It symbolizes His life. That's why He sprinkled it on the mercy seat above the law and sat down.
Our Lords' blood is not death like ours or animal blood although symbolic of bull, lamb blood. So when Moses tells them,

For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul. Lev.17:11 JJV

He's speaking of Christ in a spiritual sense because once an animal is dead it stays dead,

For after Moses had read each of God’s commandments to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats,lalong with water, and sprinkled both the book of God’s law and all the people, using hyssop branches and scarlet wool. Then he said, “This blood confirms the covenant God has made with you.” Heb.9:19-20 NLT

Moses gave them the law to lead them to repentance. Cause them to point it at themselves not others. That's the 1st thing.
The 2nd thing is Aaron and the sacrifice are seperate in the OT, but One Person in the NT.

So the high priest wasn't sprinkling the blood of the dead animal on the law. One living Man did that. Therefore life = blood.

I hooe you can see what Im saying. I will try to finish the rest of your post later.

 

[journeymanisnothing]

Jesus spoke of the eucharist wine as [representing] his blood. I wonder who would assert that his apostles drank literal blood, even before it came from his body?

Scripture says like our Lord they shed their blood for the gospel meaning they gave their lives for it. Their bodies were broken for Christs glory also, because they believed by faith Jesus will save all who come to Him even if believers are killed,

Yea, for thy sake are we killed all the day long; we are counted as sheep for the slaughter. Psa.44:22 KJV

And it began to come from his body probably when he was whipped, and certainly when he was flogged. I wonder who would assert that we were saved by his blood before he was crucified?

OT believers were saved by believing in His resurrection,

By faith Abraham...offered up offered up his only begotten son [Isaac] Of whom it was said, That iIsaac shall thy seed be called:
Heb.11:17-18 KJV

Abraham wasn't hoping for children from a dead man. Point

If he made atonement by bleeding before the cross, why bother being crucified? I wonder who would assert that under Sinai Yahweh could have commanded that the atonement animals be simply bled without killing them? The focus of atonement is in the death, usually represented by blood. MacArthur simply saw that fact.

Atonement is accomplished when God says He will forgive sincere sinners if they as it of Him. God is a loving Father to His children and we are former enemies,

If ye then, being evil,know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him? Lk.11:13 KJV

The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. Pas.51:17 KJV

Though generally speaking, blood representing life, was the tangible element of the sacrifice ritual and showed the high price of sin,

No, it showed the high price of being accuse falsely of sin,

Which of you convinceth me of sin?

If Jesus made an issue of how they falsely testifued against Him the law wiuld have convicted them and they wiuld have been executed.

according to Leviticus even flour could make the cut for the covenant restoration offering (5:11-3), atonement. Heb.9:22 was thus not an absolute literalism though absolutely true.

The manna, the rock that water came from is all Christ giving mankind what is necessary for life to continue eternally,The bread and water {Word of God/Spirit of God)

from the commandment of his lips; I have esteemed the words of his mouth more than my necessary food. Job.23:12 KJV

the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. Jn.4:14 KJV

Hope it's making sense.

 

[journeymanisnothing]

Not all sinners.

I said "if atonement isn't made a sinner is lost forever", meaning not all sinners. I'm not trying to trick you my friend . I want this to be as plain as day.

Just His elect.

The elect are those who believe in spite of their own hardships.

of them that believe to the saving of the soul. Heb.10:39 KJV

Limited atonement.

This heresy sprang from the heresy of total drapravity whick sprang from the heresy that even if people aee taught by their parents that God exists they are unable to believe in Him. It's total bs.

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Isa.5:20 KJV

I do not want to derail the thread, perhaps i will start a thread in the theology section to debate this.

Don't bother because you aren't derailing this thread by mentioning TULIP. TULIP is the ultimate slap in the face to Christ because it's foundation is that God was joyous His Son suffered.
On judgment day God will destroy all who thought beating and killing His innocent Son is was what God wanted. Only a lunatic would believe something like that. God will save all who truly repented for beating and killing His innocent Son. That is Jesus Himself will decide who beat Him and wasn't truly sorry for it.

Grace and peace to you.

Only if a a believer receives His grace,

Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: Isa.1:18 KJV

If you believe in total depravity Isa.1:18 is senseless.

 

[electedbyHim]

I said "if atonement isn't made a sinner is lost forever", meaning not all sinners. I'm not trying to trick you my friend . I want this to be as plain as day.

The elect are those who believe in spite of their own hardships.

of them that believe to the saving of the soul. Heb.10:39 KJV

This heresy sprang from the heresy of total drapravity whick sprang from the heresy that even if people aee taught by their parents that God exists they are unable to believe in Him. It's total bs.

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Isa.5:20 KJV

Don't bother because you aren't derailing this thread by mentioning TULIP. TULIP is the ultimate slap in the face to Christ because it's foundation is that God was joyous His Son suffered.
On judgment day God will destroy all who thought beating and killing His innocent Son is was what God wanted. Only a lunatic would believe something like that. God will save all who truly repented for beating and killing His innocent Son. That is Jesus Himself will decide who beat Him and wasn't truly sorry for it.

Only if a a believer receives His grace,

Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: Isa.1:18 KJV

If you believe in total depravity Isa.1:18 is senseless.

Heresy?

Indeed. I would expect nothing less from those that do not understand the Doctrines of Grace.

What do you do with this verse?

Isaiah 53:10 nasb But the LORD was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.

 

[electedbyHim]

I said "if atonement isn't made a sinner is lost forever", meaning not all sinners. I'm not trying to trick you my friend . I want this to be as plain as day.

The elect are those who believe in spite of their own hardships.

of them that believe to the saving of the soul. Heb.10:39 KJV

This heresy sprang from the heresy of total drapravity whick sprang from the heresy that even if people aee taught by their parents that God exists they are unable to believe in Him. It's total bs.

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Isa.5:20 KJV

Don't bother because you aren't derailing this thread by mentioning TULIP. TULIP is the ultimate slap in the face to Christ because it's foundation is that God was joyous His Son suffered.
On judgment day God will destroy all who thought beating and killing His innocent Son is was what God wanted. Only a lunatic would believe something like that. God will save all who truly repented for beating and killing His innocent Son. That is Jesus Himself will decide who beat Him and wasn't truly sorry for it.

Only if a a believer receives His grace,

Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: Isa.1:18 KJV

If you believe in total depravity Isa.1:18 is senseless.

Also God predestined Christ's death.

Act 2:23 nasb this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.

 

[journeymanisnothing]

God can't make atonement with sinners by pleading with them as a loving Father?
electedbyhim
Do you know that "atonement" occurs when a sinner is brought into a right relationship with God and God pleads with sinners and some turn from sin all throughout the Bible.

Gods' people are commanded to put our flesh to death (kill the old man now) where the spirit will live in a new body and that "soul" lives for eternity. Or face judgment and have body + spirit = soull destroyed by the lof. Either way,

The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. Deu.24:16 KJV

That's what Paul said in every letter he wrote.

 

[journeymanisnothing]

Heresy?

Indeed. I would expect nothing less from those that do not understand the Doctrines of Grace.

You're right because Jesus was shown no mercy. But hey, why try interpreting scripture the right way?

What do you do with this verse?

Isaiah 53:10 nasb But the LORD was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand

Will you listen? God was pleased to cruch His Son BECAUSE JESUS WAS CRUSHED BY HIS OWN LOVE FOR SINNERS. HE CHOSE NOT TO CONDEMN THEM. Because Jesus is the express Image of His Father on earth, not some vile substitue sinner

 

[electedbyHim]

You're right becayse Jesus was shown no mercy. But hey, why try interpreting scripture the right way?

Will you listen? God was pleased to cruch His Son BECAUSE JESUS WAS CRUSHED BY HIS OWN LOVE FOR SINNERS. HE CHOSE NOT TO CONDEMN THEM.

Forgive my ignorance, but your replies are very conflicting and confusing to me.

 

[journeymanisnothing]

Also God predestined Christ's death.

Act 2:23 nasb this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.

You are assuming "the predermined plan and foreknowledge of God" only includes saving people. It never did even with the law because the law was meant to humble people, convict them of sin and bring about repentance.
What was done to Jesus clearly shows why God will destroy anyone who violated His Son, His Temple. The Son now allows space for sinning against Him., but will condemn the unrepentant.

When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen? They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men...Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in oureyes? Mt.21:40-42 KJV

 

[journeymanisnothing]

Forgive my ignorance, but your replies are very conflicting and confusing to me.

I haven't said one thing that conflicts. Why don't you actually point to anything I posted and tell me why I can just forgive someone who sinned against me if they sincerely asked, but God can't? My earthly dad could too, but that's how I could before I asked God for forgivness.

I've already told you why. You've examined nothing I've posted. You simple show more at first goance objections from other areas of the Bible. I've answered all of your objections soundly and you go onto other things.

Here's a few questions for you,

I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.....He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought frui tthereon, and found none. Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard...cut it down.....
And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it: And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.
Lk.13:3,5,7-9 KJV

My question is, if Jesus is always in agreement with His Father, why doesn't He just obey and cut the tree down? Why does Jesus' will to keep the tree override Fathers will to kill it?

Could the Father and Son who are always One in agreement be thinking as One mind whether to give a sinner more time to repent as only God can? (<---this is the true One)

Or a slim 3rd possibility God is talking to Himself but is schitzoid.

 

[electedbyHim]

You are assuming "the predermined plan and foreknowledge of God" only includes saving people. It never did even with the law because the law was meant to humble people, convict them of sin and bring about repentance.
What was done to Jesus clearly shows why God will destroy anyone who violated His Son, His Temple. The Son now allows space for sinning against Him., but will condemn the unrepentant.

When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen? They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men...Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in oureyes? Mt.21:40-42 KJV

You are assuming "the predermined plan and foreknowledge of God" only includes saving people. It never did even with the law because the law was meant to humble people, convict them of sin and bring about repentance.
What was done to Jesus clearly shows why God will destroy anyone who violated His Son, His Temple. The Son now allows space for sinning against Him., but will condemn the unrepentant.

I am not assuming anything.

The text says nothing about your comment.

Act 2:23 nasb this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.

Again your replies are very confusing.

 

[electedbyHim]

I haven't said one thing that conflicts. Why don't you actually point to anything I posted and tell me why I can just forgive someone who sinned against me if they sincerely asked, but God can't? My earthly dad could too, but that's how I could before I asked God for forgivness.

I've already told you why. You've examined nothing I've posted. You simple show more at first goance objections from other areas of the Bible. I've answered all of your objections soundly and you go onto other things.

Here's a few questions for you,

I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.....He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought frui tthereon, and found none. Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard...cut it down.....
And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it: And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.
Lk.13:3,5,7-9 KJV

My question is, if Jesus is always in agreement with His Father, why doesn't He just obey and cut the tree down? Why does Jesus' will to keep the tree override Fathers will to kill it?

Could the Father and Son who are always One in agreement be thinking as One mind whether to give a sinner more time to repent as only God can? (<---this is the true One)

Or a slim 3rd possibility God is talking to Himself but is schitzoid.

I have no clue what you are talking about here.

 

[Vinny37]

In post #39 you say Jesus' blood" means "death"". It doesn't. It symbolizes His life....

Some imprecision on my part—and indeed on Paul’s in Rm.5:9. Mine, as Paul’s, was the context of blood shed unto death, life laid down (Rm.5:10), ie blood = death, precisely because it means life in a living creature (ie blood = life). Words mean according to context. Context is king and words multifunctional.

What literalist would claim that Paul avoided chatting with blood, even though that’s what he claimed (Gal.1:16)? It’s surely clear that he used there two biological elements (viz flesh & blood) to mean human beings, and indeed, fellow Christians in leadership. Likewise we can agree with Paul that a Shylockian pound of flesh can never be justified, only Paul actually used metonymy to mean human being (Rm.3:20).

Scripture is replete with symbolism and metaphor, and the blood of dead animals daubed on doorposts could symbolise the animals’ deaths. I think that MacArthur scotched the idea that Jesus’ literal blood had, in short, been scooped up and deposited (alive?) in heaven—a highly pictorial idea, as is the idea of ultimate heaven being a literal place with physical temple & palace.

I hope you don’t deny that Jesus’ death was human death, though I guess we’d agree that it was voluntary and for global, if not universal, atonement with God. Scripture affirms the real humanity (life/death/resurrection) of Jesus and his one-of-a-kind filiality.

I hope you can see what I’m saying.

 

[Vinny37]

...

No, it showed the high price of being accuse falsely of sin,

Which of you convinceth me of sin?

If Jesus made an issue of how they falsely testifued against Him the law wiuld have convicted them and they wiuld have been executed.
...

Please, please read a little more carefully. I said that [generally speaking, blood representing life, was the tangible element of the sacrifice ritual and showed the high price of sin]. That’s a clear teaching of Leviticus, namely man’s guilt. For you to then deny my point, because Jesus was innocent, is a non sequitur. It’s a bit like me saying that the guy staggering out of the pub is drunk, and you saying, “No, my mother never gets drunk”. It’s a category error. The whole point of the atonement—in the PSA picture—was that man’s sin demanded the high price of sin, which one man without sin paid for to end man’s death/severance from God.

Yes, I am well aware, thank you, that in that specific (not general) case, it “showed the high price of being accuse (sic) falsely of sin”; that none could prove (no longer what the medieval KJV's ‘convince’ means) Yeshua guilty of sin (Jhn.8:46).

PS: if you typed postings in a word processor you’d improve your spelling (eg testifued/wiuld x2).

 

[journeymanisnothing]

I am not assuming anything.

The text says nothing about your comment.

After Peter said this,

they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles,Men and brethren, what shall we do? Act.2:37

Peter told them to repent. Peter told them they would receive the Holy Spirit after. They were unregenerated sinners who had to repent first. We know without doubt Peter was speaking by the Spirit.
Do you agree with me that in Acts 2, Peter is talking to unsaved people who knew what the OT said, but didn't understand it properly until Peter explained it?

Act 2:23 nasb this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.

Again your replies are very confusing.

Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. Act.241 KJV

If you are still confused, put all of your thoughts aside. Put my thought aside. Put your pastors aside. put what everyone says aside.

I'm asking you to look at what Peter said and by your own understanding of language what is Peter saying? Don't go to a commentary where someone else is filling your head. I want to know in your own words without other commentary what is Peter saying to you?

 

[journeymanisnothing]

I have no clue what you are talking about here.

You said my posts are contrary to one another. Show me one example.

 

[electedbyHim]

You said my posts are contrary to one another. Show me one example.

Because you jump from one topic to the next.

We were discussing...
Isaiah 53:10 nasb But the LORD was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.

And everything went amiss.

Here is the real issue.

We are both way off topic.

I encourage you to open a thread and we can discuss the issue and stay on topic.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[JLB]

This is a blatant HERESY, and is AGAINST what the Bible VERY CLEARLY Teaches!

"How much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God" - Hebrews 9:14

"Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins" - Hebrews 9:22

"In him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace" - Ephesians 1:7

"But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ" - Ephesians 2:13

"And through Him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of His cross" - Colossians 1:20

"And from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of kings on earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by His blood" - Revelation 1:5

There can be NO DOUBT, that the ACTUAL Blood that Jesus Christ Shed on the Cross, ALONE cleanses us from our sins!

There is NO justification from the Bible with what MacArthur, argues, that it is only the Death of Jesus Christ that saves sinners!

He is ADDING to what the Bible Teaches! and is FALSE!

That’s all he and his followers have ever done.

Promote Heresy.

 

[electedbyHim]

That’s all he and his followers have ever done.

Promote Heresy.

Yet you cannot even refute what the Pastor says.

This is great stuff.

Grace and peace to you.