Tags
John MacArthur: “Jesus does not presently exercise His full divine will over the earth.”
Christ is Lord of the earth in the sense of His being its Creator and its ultimate Ruler; but He does not presently exercise His full divine will over the earth. – John MacArthur
All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, “What have you done?” – Daniel 4:35 (ESV)
I cannot see how any Christian can deny, in any way whatsoever, that Jesus Christ, fully God, King of kings, Lord of lords, the blessed and only Sovereign, He who upholds the universe by the word of His power (Hebrews. 1:3) and to whom has been given ALL authority not only in heaven but also on earth (Matthew 28:18) – all things, everything, in heaven and earth, was created for Him, by Him and through Him (Colossians 1:16) has somehow been thwarted, in any way, for whatever reason, from exercising His full divine will over the earth…. but John MacArthur does.
Not only is this man teaching two ways of salvation, one for the present and another for after the second advent of Christ, but as you will see clearly in his own words below, he also seems to deny the Lords sovereignty in the administration and operation of this world.
God’s kingly rule over the hearts of men and over the world may be thought of as having a number of phases. The first is the prophesied kingdom, such as that foretold by Daniel. The second phase is the present kingdom, the one that existed at the time of John the Baptist and that he mentions. It is the kingdom that both John and Jesus spoke of as being at hand (cf. 4:17). The third phase may be referred to as the interim kingdom, the kingdom that resulted because of Israel’s rejection of her King. The King returned to heaven and His kingdom on earth now exists only in a mystery form. Christ is Lord of the earth in the sense of His being its Creator and its ultimate Ruler; but He does not presently exercise His full divine will over the earth. He is, so to speak, in a voluntary exile in heaven until it is time for Him to return again. He reigns only in the hearts of those who know Him as Savior and Lord. (emphasis mine) – John MacArthur, quoted from The Kingdom of Heaven
Well this man has lied. The audacity of this man is mind boggling – but the teaching is what I stand so strongly against. We must remember, that he is not the only one who teaches such things. All dispensationalists teach this lie. MacArthur just happens to be the most visible and influential.
Clearly, MacArthur is speaking of the extent of Christ’ current reign. He is not speaking of Jesus exercising His divine will in judgment against sinners – that is nowhere to be found in the quote. Judgment is not the context.
First of all, look again (carefully) at what he says again:
Christ is Lord of the earth in the sense of His being its Creator and its ultimate Ruler; but He does not presently exercise His full divine will over the earth. He is, so to speak, in a voluntary exile in heaven until it is time for Him to return again. He reigns only in the hearts of those who know Him as Savior and Lord. (emphasis mine).
Just look at two points alone:
He says: Jesus is Lord but not presently exercising His full divine will over the earth. So there is some portion or aspect of this earth which He is not controlling? Is that what Scripture teaches us? Of course not.
He says: Jesus is in a voluntary exile. Really? He voluntarily expelled Himself from His home or country? Nonsense. His home was heaven, in all His glory. He left heaven to redeem His elect and then ascended again. This earth is not his ‘home’ – but it is fully under His command.
John MacArthur has made his assault on the sovereignty of Christ in the quote above, and this is not the first, and I doubt it will be the last.
Again, premillennial dispensationalism is a heresy of the worst sort plaguing much of evangelicalism today. It is Christ dishonoring and contrary to the written Word of God.
Brethren, this teaching that Jesus Christ our Lord is not exercising His full divine will upon the earth, is an assault on the Lord of glory – and you should not be silent about it. MacArthur has been making this ‘mistake’ for decades.
Please, wake up.
I recall preaching something on this…..
“Mistake” or “lie”? Also, is part of having complete control choosing not to exercise it? Or does sovereignty require constant meddling?
I believe Jesus has complete control…but that doesn’t mean He actually exercises it over thing that happens (although I do believe He knows everything that will happen).
I may be misunderstanding your point Joel…apologize if I do.
The Jesus of the Bible doesn’t ‘meddle’. And, friend, your statement is saying clearly that some things He does not control because He chooses not to. Find that in Scripture, and get back to me.
Before I do. What “level” are you saying He controls. For instance, is He controlling the fact I am typing this right now? (I assume not.)
I ask this as a serious question…not disrespectfully. As I’ve read various Calvinistic thought I have never quite figured out what level of control Calvinists believe God exerts.
Once I understand more what you are suggesting I’ll try to respond. (Having said that, I would point to God “giving them up” in Romans 1…where He appears to let people do what they will and face the consequences.)
And you are right, “meddle” was a bad choice of words. I just couldn’t think of another word that didn’t have negative connotations.
Every level. You can’t tie your shoes without His power and control. You owe your very next breath to Him. He is everything.
Pastor Joel, can you clear something up? You support divine sovereignty from the Old Testament, quoting the words of Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 4. But then you argue in the comments below that Christ gave his enthronement speech in Matthew 28. Was Christ king before his ascension? You said, “if Christ is not enthroned, He is not King,” so by your words, apparently not.
What we have in your teaching, then, is that through the time of the Old Testament Christ was not yet reigning as King, but that divine sovereignty was still exercised over the affairs of men. So it seems, in your view, that limiting the reign of Christ is compatible with divine sovereignty in the Old Testament. But your argument against MacArthur seems to be that the same two are incompatible in the New Testament. Where’s the difference?
The issue is whether Jesus Christ is presently exercising His full divine will over the earth, and He is.
Hmmm…I don’t disagree with your “entry level”…but there is a bit difference between my owing him my very next breath and Him sovereignly deciding I am going to type the letter K right now (or tie my shoes at exactly 8:43 in the morning). So, I guess I’m still not sure what level of control you are talking…can you clarify?
Joel…any response to my last question? I would like to provide a scriptural basis for what I suggest, but need to know exactly what level of control you say Jesus is exerting. For instance, was He behind me typing this, my next sip of Diet Pepsi, and so on? As I mentioned before, this is something I haven’t quite gotten a handle on when it comes to Calvinist thought…and definitely would appreciate your insights.
P.S. I don’t know if your “Notify me of follow-up comments via email” is working…
JT,
WOW ! I agree totally on this. To protect Israel Christ goes on vacation? I was a pre-mil til I put away the charts and read the Bible.
MacArthur bends so much to fit his predispositions.
Thanks for staying and you have caused me to re-visit my Civil War history and change.
H
Pingback: Does Jesus exercise His divine will upon the earth? | Sola Dei Gloria
I’m sure that MacArthur would say that you are the one wrong here. This is only one of many areas of disagreement among Christians. It doesn’t make MacArthur a heretic-or you, for those who happen to agree with him.
Heresy is not ‘a disagreement’ it is a lie. It is a deviation from truth, and it is cause for correction to say the least.
Well… I do believe that is the first time I’ve heard your voice…
You really are from Arkansas.
Pingback: Social Justice & the Mission of King Jesus « Kingdom Impressions
Not the ‘ol ‘Mysterious Disappearance of Jesus’ teaching again. I also enjoyed your No King But Jesus video.
So let me get this premillenial sequence of events straight in my mind.
Ok , So Jesus comes a first time , to die on the cross, but contrary to what scripture says , doesn’t quite have the victory over Satan , because there are these problematic people called Jews, that even though they do not acknowledge God, they are his chosen people, and as such , they only believe when they see Christ, unlike Gods unchosen people, who believe by faith.
Jesus then ascends to heaven, to be given a seat at the right of hand of God, but this is only a temporary time , because soon Jesus will have to return for , you guessed it , those jews who will only believe when they see. But is this really the second coming?, not too sure, because this is Christs return as per Matt 24, there is still the Matt 25 coming of Christ which would be the third coming, unless you could somehow explain away the second coming. Any way, I’m getting ahead of myself here, because Christ, who already humbled himself to become a man, and then ascended into heaven, now must endure another thousand years among men, with the thought that one day in a thousand yrs time, He will have to confront yet another rebellion. But wait, wasn’t Satan released from the abyss in Rev 9,? must have been some else, because the old Dragon is only captured in Rev 20, and then released after a thousand years for the final judgement.
Confused? You should be, because I do not see any of this in the bible. I guess what I should have said earlier is that Mac and co are obliged to deny Christ’s deity, because this, according to premills, will only be realised when the Jews recognize Jesus.
Joel: this is the dumbest thing you have ever posted.
Consider this news story:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-15650909
Now ask yourself this question: why was the perpetrator of this crime not immediately cast into hell? Is it because Jesus does not hate sin? Or is it because God has restrained this aspect of His wil until a future time when he will execute the final judgment — especially for the sake of the elect?
There is no lie involved in pointing out that Jesus is not right now casting sinners into hell now, and that this action is reserved for the final judgment. That’s all that Dr. MacArthur is saying, and that you can’t see that is simply your failure to read the Bible well. You should repent of calling Dr. MacArthur a liar immediately.
Frank,
Apparently, you were too busy defending MacArthur to even read the quote-or the article referenced. That’s too bad. If you had bothered, you would notice that:
1) In the issue at hand, which I’ve specified, Mac mentions nothing of future judgement, as you assume, but is speaking of Christ current, present, right now exercise of His divine will over the present, current earth. He makes that crystal clear.
2) Mac mentions nothing of ‘casting sinners into Hell now’ nor does he mention, nor is he speaking of that action being reserved for the final judgment. That too, is absent.
3) Frank, you say ‘That’s all Dr. MacArthur is saying’. Well my friend, either you are stone blind, or, you didn’t read the quote nor the referenced article. Either way, you misspoke due to ignorance of the subject at hand. Thus, proving that you are among the poor souls who make comments before actually reading a post. Tsk, tsk. But, all is not lost, I still love ya brother, you’re just obviously wrong this time.
No, Frank, I will never repent for pointing out error in the Church. Dispensationalism is a lie, and those who teach it are teaching a lie, regardless of name or status.
What do the Scriptures mean, then, when by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, John the apostle wrote,
“We know that we are of God, and that the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.” 1John 5:19
The Scriptures clearly indicate that there is a tension between the eternal Kingdom that has no beginning and no end, and the Kingdom in this eschaton which will end: an “already but also not yet” reality which our minds may not understand but our spirit understands. Just as Jesus was the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world, yet He entered time/space eschaton on a particlular day and was crucifiled on a particluar day in history. Both realities are true.
We must let the Scriptures speak for themselves and form our beliefs, rather than form a system of theology into which we try to fit the Scriptures. Read the Scripture at face value and you will see that there is a Kingdom yet to be fully manifest on the earth; as for now, we are sojourners in a foreign land–this world and its systems.
I do not believe the Jewish people have any other hope of redemption than through the gospel of the Lamb, the Messiah and Lord Jesus Christ. Yet, the Kingdom of God is not yet NOW in full “control”; tares are growing alongside the wheat, powers and principalities are resisting and rebelling.
Please do not set your mind on one system of theology so that you cannot read the Scriptures with a receptive heart.
I’m not a dispensationalist, but, if all I had to go off was this quote, I would have to give J Mac a break. It seems to me that the natural reading of the quote is simply that Macarthur is saying that we do not yet live in the new heavens and the new earth. When Christ’s “full” divine will is exercised over the earth, there will be no more suffering, no more tears, only the joyous experience of living in the light of the Son. That time is not yet come. So, while, yes, Jesus reigns from the right hand of the Father, and, yes, His sovereign will is being done and it cannot be thwarted by anyone or anything, there will be a day when we will sin and rebellion will finally be banished and Jesus will reign over the new creation. That day has not yet come, thus, Thus, Macarthur says His “full” divine will is not exercised. Maybe he could have worded it better, but it certainly does not seem worthy of him being called a liar.
You missed this however, he is discussing Christ current exercise of His divine will – current, not future. Big difference. No break.
I’m not drying to be a Macarthur apologist, but I’m still not getting your beef. In his current reign, Christ is not enthroned, sitting upon the new heavens and new earth where his “full” divine is exercised. He is currently seated in the heavenlies where he currently accomplishes his sovereign will, yet not in the “fullness” that we will one day see.
Doug, if Christ is not enthroned, He is not King. Yet the Scriptures declare Him both to be enthroned and as the King of kings. He gave His enthronement speech Matthew 28.
Good grief Joel. You knew what I was saying. I said he was seated in the heavenlies (Ephesians 2:6), in other words, he is “enthroned” in the heavenlies, as opposed to being enthroned in the new heavens and new earth (Rev. 21) where we will lay our eyes upon Him and where there will be no more death, mourning, or pain. It seems to me that is the “fullness” of what Macarthur is talking about. To argue that I was saying Jesus is not enthroned is just silly and makes it look like you are just arguing for argument’s sake.
Doug, you’re still missing the point bro. MacArthur is talking about right now, Jesus’ current, present exercise of His will over the earth, right now. Mac is not speaking of the ‘new heavens and new earth’ he’s talking about God’s will being fully exercised over this one, right now.
If he is, indeed, saying that Christ has no rule in this earth outside of that which he accomplishes within the heart’s of believers, then I would agree that he is way off here. I am with you in affirming that Christ’s sovereign rule extends even to the words I am typing right now. I just did not see that as being the point that Macarthur was trying to make based upon the above quote. So I did a quick 2 second search and came up with this exchange between Phil Johnson and Macarthur over this subject. Phil asks him about the sovereignty of God and this is what follows (you may wish John’s language is a bit more nuanced, but it certainly is not a refutation of God’s sovereignty that you seem to have taken the above quotation to be).
PHIL: Now, is this one of those issues that’s clear in Scripture or somewhat mysterious? How much stress would you say Scripture puts on this doctrine?
JOHN: I think it is everywhere in Scripture. It is inescapable, everywhere in Scripture God is designated clearly and revealed to be sovereign. I don’t think it’s a question of revelation, I think it’s a question of comprehension. The Bible is crystal-clear that God is the ruler, that God rules, that God does what He will, that no one can thwart His purpose, no one can stop His hand, that all things work together for good, that He is orchestrating all of human history and everything in it. Scripture says that.
Like other things, we can know that that’s what the Bible says but not fully comprehend how that works out, or why things are the way they are, if that is in fact true. But as to the truthfulness of it, it is crystal-clear in Scripture. There’s no equivocating on that.
PHIL: So, people always say then, “But that’s fatalism.” How is that different from fatalism?
JOHN: Well, because God has an intention within His actions that is not purely arbitrary and it is not left to chance. Fatalism would be the assumption that things are going to be whatever they’re going to be, just because they’re going to be that way. There’s no superintending power, there’s no overriding plan, there’s no person who is purposefully doing all of these things, or allowing these things, fitting them together for a pre-determined plan. Fatalism just looks at the universe as random acts, going whatever way they go by chance. That’s very different than the sovereignty of God because God is purposefully taking all contingencies, all actions, all events and working them together to a pre-determined end. Nothing is by chance. Nothing is happenstance. Nothing is a surprise to Him. Nothing is outside His box, there are no, “Oops, how did that happen?” to God. It is all within the framework of His plan. It needs to be said at that point that doesn’t mean that God motivates everything that happens, He doesn’t…doesn’t motivate evil, He doesn’t cause evil, He doesn’t do evil. What it does say is, however, evil does not change the plan. Evil does not deter God. Evil does not cause God to have to alter His purpose. He takes all that happens and fits it into the plan and the plan is already determined.
Gotta agree with Joel on this one. Perhaps John Mac didn’t mean what he said, but what he said can only be taken to mean that things are currently happening in the earthly realm that are contrary to Jesus’ will. In other words, things are happening which could cause our King and Lord to say “Oops…I didn’t want that to happen.”
I abhor any theology that denies our God from being sovereign over His entire creation.
Richard,
I assume, then, that you didn’t just read him say in the interview with Phil that I just posted the following:
“God is purposefully taking all contingencies, all actions, all events and working them together to a pre-determined end. Nothing is by chance. Nothing is happenstance. Nothing is a surprise to Him. Nothing is outside His box, there are no, “Oops, how did that happen?” to God. It is all within the framework of His plan.”
I think you have plainly ignored the sentence, “He is, so to speak, in a voluntary exile in heaven until it is time for Him to return again.” There is no question that Dr. MacArthur is speaking in the eschatological sense here. The phrase “until it is time for Him to return again” tips off the alert reader to that.
The astute reader will find this in the essay you have linked:
The fourth phase can be described as the manifest kingdom, in which Christ will rule, physically, directly, and fully on earth for a thousand years, the Millennium. In that kingdom He will rule both externally and internally-externally over all mankind, and internally in the hearts of those who belong to Him by faith. The fifth, and final, phase is the “eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,” which “will be abundantly supplied” to all of His own (2 Pet. 1:11).
Plainly: what God has restrained in himself, he has restrained for the last days.
You’re wrong, Joel, and you need to apologize, or retract the post. this is a clear case of you simply ignoring words for the purpose of, well, whatever it is you think you are doing here.
Wow, Frank, thanks for the Christian condescension. Rejected.
We’re not talking about a single sentence Frank. I won’t let you weasle your way out of this one. It wouldn’t be profitable to others.
You’re not addressing the quote at hand, but bringing in another to stress eschatology. Shame on you Frank. That is not the focus of the post, nor the quote being addressed, nor the context of MacArthur’s teaching in this case. Nice attempt, but you’re forcing your imagined point. Amateur mistake.
By the way, you have more than once avowed yourself an Ammilennialist, so I find it quite interesting that you now quote Mac on a clearly non-amill position without objection to it. Interesting. Have you switched? Compromising for gain? Do I need to post links?
But, back to the point.
Frank, Macs comment is not about the last days, but about the Lord Jesus current reign and extent of His current exercising of His Divine will over the present earth.
You know it. So do I. But here you are defending a pre-mill postion, all the while knowing it is contrary to Scripture. Think, before your next reply.
P.S. No, I will not apologize for defending the truth, nor will I detract a post exposing serious error.
For the supporters of Joel’s view here, what does the Psalmist mean in Ps 78? How is that any different than what Dr. MacArthur is talking about here?
If you’re going to quote someone, give a link.
If you want Macarthur’s view on the sovereignty of God, you can get it here in this interview with Phil Johnson. Based upon this, either he has changed his mind, he is contradicting himself, or, as I would contend, you are misinterpreting what he has written above to mean something he does not intend to be saying.
The link:
http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/GTY125/Answering-Big-Questions-About-the-Sovereignty-of-God
An excerpt:
To the point at hand, concerning God’s sovereignty, Phil asks:
Now, is this one of those issues that’s clear in Scripture or somewhat mysterious? How much stress would you say Scripture puts on this doctrine?
JOHN: I think it is everywhere in Scripture. It is inescapable, everywhere in Scripture God is designated clearly and revealed to be sovereign. I don’t think it’s a question of revelation, I think it’s a question of comprehension. The Bible is crystal-clear that God is the ruler, that God rules, that God does what He will, that no one can thwart His purpose, no one can stop His hand, that all things work together for good, that He is orchestrating all of human history and everything in it. Scripture says that.
Like other things, we can know that that’s what the Bible says but not fully comprehend how that works out, or why things are the way they are, if that is in fact true. But as to the truthfulness of it, it is crystal-clear in Scripture. There’s no equivocating on that.
PHIL: So, people always say then, “But that’s fatalism.” How is that different from fatalism?
JOHN: Well, because God has an intention within His actions that is not purely arbitrary and it is not left to chance. Fatalism would be the assumption that things are going to be whatever they’re going to be, just because they’re going to be that way. There’s no superintending power, there’s no overriding plan, there’s no person who is purposefully doing all of these things, or allowing these things, fitting them together for a pre-determined plan. Fatalism just looks at the universe as random acts, going whatever way they go by chance. That’s very different than the sovereignty of God because God is purposefully taking all contingencies, all actions, all events and working them together to a pre-determined end. Nothing is by chance. Nothing is happenstance. Nothing is a surprise to Him. Nothing is outside His box, there are no, “Oops, how did that happen?” to God. It is all within the framework of His plan. It needs to be said at that point that doesn’t mean that God motivates everything that happens, He doesn’t…doesn’t motivate evil, He doesn’t cause evil, He doesn’t do evil. What it does say is, however, evil does not change the plan. Evil does not deter God. Evil does not cause God to have to alter His purpose. He takes all that happens and fits it into the plan and the plan is already determined.
Joel is a bit harder on Mac than I would be (that’s saying quite a bit), but what I’ve said before I’ll say again: John MacArthur has a history of being wrong in his doctrine – especially muddleheaded and “fuzzy” on details – and imprecise in his language. The above is a good example of a both-and scenario. My stock advice regarding MacArthur remains: He’s well-meaning but generally not a good source of teaching. Avoid Mac and stick with the countless vastly superior exposigetes living and dead.
Pray for Mac and his many die-hard “fans.”
Stick with the dead guys, I trust few living, including myself.
Yes, I too would highly favor the dead guys. But even some of them were much better than others. Not all departed exposigetes are created equal. In fact, I suspect a few of those brothers will reap a meager reward when their body of work is weighed. Agreed?
Pingback: WE ARE KINGS AND PRIESTS | bummyla