False Teachers in our own Ranks

Maybe he's not altogether a wolf in sheep's clothes just because he may be wrong on this issue. Wolves in the church maliciously prey on the innocent after knowingly beguiling them. Wrong as he may be on this issue and others I just don't see him as a wolf lying in wait to devour. That's all.

Just because a man espouses an erroneous eschatological view such as dispensationalism, doesn't make him a wolf by necessity.

If that were so, there are whole packs of them surrounding the camp of the saints. You'd be entertaining wolves often, and unaware of it.

Pray for the peace of all those who are jews inwardly by faith in the Messiah, Jesus. Amen.

Here's an excellent sermon by Carter Conlon titled, "Wolves"
https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?lid=2158&commentView=itemComments

I disagree with a lot of John MacArthur's eschatological view. I also disagree with things that other people on this forum have said--things that I believe are very plain in the scripture. Are they all wolves? Who here has perfect doctrinal understanding? Who in here has attained all there is to know in Christ through His Word. No one.

There are thing my pastor has said that I find very wrong--but he does bear fruit and he does love the brethren and he does follow Jesus. He is not a wolf but we do not see eye to eye.

What do you have that you have not received. Why do you boast as if you have not received it? Why are we holding people to a standard that you yourself have not attained. It makes no sense. Even prominent people in the faith still have things to learn.

Can we PLEASE stop all this nonsense and only speak that which is necessary for edification? I don't feel edified reading things like this. Only discouraged because we keep drawing dividing line over dividing line over dividing line.

Think of how much more we would grow in Christ if we did that. Think of how much more our hearts would be set on Christ if we did that. Would we not be far more prepped for revival and serving Christ if we did that?

Thanks for the message Lysa.

Its a good checkpoint to see if you have any wolf tendencies. We should check ourselves.

havok20x....There are things my pastor has said that I find very wrong--but he does bear fruit and he does love the brethren and he does follow Jesus. He is not a wolf but we do not see eye to eye.

"Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons"

Most people here who have objected a bit to labeling Dr. MacArthur as a wolf in sheep's clothing have also said that there are points that they disagree with him on. So Dr. MacArthur is not bring handed a blank check of approval. Posting and forcefully saying things like the American church has forfeited its right to heaven because they voted for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton is not sound either as far as correct doctrine versus error goes. Dr. MacArthur, not being given a blank check, never had said anything along those preposterous lines. How one is saved is not something of secondary importance either. So we all perhaps need to pay closer attention to what we say or teach. If a person is wrong on certain points we still don't need to see them after the flesh.

Peace. No need to build a fire here.

As an aside

Hey Blaine,

Do you still have my email address? Can you write to me? You no longer have your email under your profile.

Got a question about AR.

Thanks.

It is only an issue if it is a literal mark. If its not there is no issue.

Is there any other place in scripture where a person who does something is forever damned with no hope of redemption? I am not talking about rejecting the Lord until they die- I am talking about someone doing something and the action itself damns them for all eternity?

The worst sins imaginable were committed in the pages of scripture by various individuals who ultimately found forgiveness when they repented.

That is why I have a hard time believing that the action of taking a literal mark is an automatic stamp of damnation.

Now, if the mark is simply symbolic of an acquiescence to an evil world system and persistent refusal to side with God, it makes much more sense.

Some respected commentators from the past felt that the acceptance of the mark was throwing in ones lot with roman catholicism and the popes. They may very well be right.

And Bear, why does it really matter what JMac believes on this topic? As you know there are an embarrassingly large number of different end times views; are all those that propose views that differ from yours false teachers or wolves in sheep clothing? Of course not. I don't agree with the end times view of the church I attend- at all. I just get over it. I don't think the pastor is a wolf in disguise.

Brother Blaine,

I am far from perfect. You'll have to forgive me of being so forceful in the distant past. I, like every child of God, am being renewed and transformed day by day.

John MacArthur is indeed one of my own. He is a brother in Christ. You are also one of my own--a brother in Christ.. I don't agree with him on this point, but he has yet to enter glory either. He only knows in part right now, just like the rest of us.

I am not asking that we don't discuss these issues, but why malign anyone along the way. Does it matter who thinks what so much as we learn the truth?

What would be more effective for the body of Christ? Calling out every false prophet one by one, issue by issue or teaching the truth and allowing us to discern all teachings and all spirits?

So what type of persons would be included in the following:

28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.
31 Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.

It seems this was of great concern for the Apostles as there are many such references in the scriptures....
If we can identify the areas that are nonnegotiable then perhaps we could reconcile this issue?

Reading over the posts, there are many aspects that I can readily agree to tho brother Bear does make a valid point that there is an inconsistency in our overall application of discernment. Some get a pass, others the benefit of the doubt, while others get no margin for error due to their reputation or the reputation of their church family or denomination.... this doesn't seem to be as clearly demarcated by Holy Spirit as it was for Peter, Paul, etc...
I mean we are all partakers of the same bread so why are we so inconsistent in these matters?
It's like we all have differing places where we break fellowship, some are tight and some are loose which means we aren't on the same page and yet in the Acts church they were of one accord... is it not incumbent upon us all to submit to Holy Spirits direction? And surely He isn't acting inconsistently in His watch over us.... so what gives?

All who are led by the same spirit should come to the same conclusion, no?

Well, the bible is crystal clear about this matter.

https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=mark+of+the+beast&qs_version=KJV

Warning to McArthur and Co. better take this serious

Revelation 22:18-20 (KJV)

18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

RE : /// This goes against what the historic church has believed and taught.///

I have not found any continuity concerning eschatological beliefs of any kind in and through Church History.

As far as the early writings, did they not believe that there was a correlation with Nero ?

https://www.scrollpublishing.com/store/666-old.html

Just to take us down a side track, without offending any teacher or their followers :)

I am by no means a master of Revelation revelation, if you get my drift?
I usually read it with awe and wonder, amazement and joy for the privilege of knowing such an awesome God and Savior.

However, just a thought: Does this mark, received (seemingly not forced) not refer us back to Jesus words, that you cannot serve both God and Mammon (either you serve God wholeheartedly and receive His reward, or money, world system and receive its reward:judgement)

See Elliot's Commentary below, short and sweet, and makes sense to me:
"Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(9) And the third angel . .””Better, And another angel, a third, followed them, saying in a loud voice, If any man worship the wild beast and his image, and a mark upon his forehead or upon his hand, he also himself shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mingled pure (in full strength, undiluted, e.g., "He shall have judgment without mercy that hath showed no mercy,” James 2:13) in the cup of his indignation, and shall be tormented in fire, &c., &c. This third angel naturally follows the other two, which describe the powers which are in conflict: the word of God, and the Babylon of the world; the gospel will triumph; Babylon is doomed; hence comes the warning that men should not identify themselves with the city of worldliness, falsehood, and sin. The reference to the wild beast, the image, and the mark, carries us back to the last chapter, and shows us that Babylon is only another aspect of the work of God’s enemies: it is the city of the world-power. The warning not to receive the mark is a declaration that man, individual man, is responsible: there is no necessity for his receiving the mark, the hall-mark of a cowardly connivance at wrong-doing, or for setting his judgments by the fashions of the world."

//I have not found any continuity concerning eschatological beliefs of any kind in and through Church History.//

Which is why I have called it "embarrassing." Think about it- evangelicals claim to follow a book inspired by the living God but when it comes to end times seemingly no one can agree on what it means. That's pretty embarrassing.

I think the reason there is no agreement is that the EXACT DETAILS are not meant to be understood and each person tries to force their own literal meaning onto symbolic or hidden imagery.

If we could simply approach the end times with a sincere reverence for Jesus and do what he says, and then take a "wait and see" approach to how it will all play out, there would be a lot more unity in the Church.

The disunity in the church over eschatological matters arose when Israel was replaced in the thinking of the church. People can't even agree today that Christ will return to Jerusalem from whence He left and returned. In prophecy in many quarters Jerusalem now means the church or something. Anything but a real Jerusalem. When a literal Israel was replaced there was no alternative but to develop a over reliance on the symbolic and allegorical.

I wasn't even thinking of the Israel issue- I was just thinking in general about the plethora of end time scenarios out there.

We have disagreements over every scintilla of scripture that supposedly has anything to do with future events.

Let us please quit comparing ourselves by ourselves.

Levying the claim of "False Prophet", "False Teacher", and "False Convert" are all SERIOUS accusations against an individual. There are some things that can be taught that are CLEARLY wrong. When an individual teaches something that is incorrect that does not automatically make them a wolf. It makes them wrong. There must be a consistent pattern of wicked behavior. Go look at the scriptures--every false prophet or false teaching ALSO came with licentiousness and wicked behavior. It was driven by greed, by lust, by self-ambition.

There are NO false prophets who DO what the Bible says. They may look like they do on the outside, but they miss all the mercy, all the grace, all the love for the brethren and the Lord. Their fruit is bad, because they are a bad tree.

I don't think anyone on this forum knows John MacArthur on a personal level. None of the things he has said about himself warrants the belief that the fruit that he bears is bad.

Lastly, there is no rock-solid, black-and-white test that is a predictor of the hearts of men. I do know individuals who taught bad doctrine, who did wicked things, and yet, upon following through with Matthew 18 and similar passages, they repented and were set straight. Turns out they were believers and were deceived. Could that REALLY happen??? Yes. Just go read 1 and 2 Corinthians back to back and see what that looks like. If every person who believed/said/taught something that was not exactly right was scrutinized like this, then every one of us would be condemned.

So, my solution to this problem we are seeing in this forum is this: Discuss the issues. Leave people out of it. If there is enough biblical evidence to suggest that they may be a false prophet, then maybe it can be brought up (only if it edifies the church)--but let's bring it up from a position of humility rather than accusing them of being a false prophet--i.e. asking what other people think. Who knows? Perhaps wisdom comes from many counselors and is not born with us? Maybe we'd all be edified instead of defensive. Maybe, just maybe, doing and acting like the Bible says really does yield better fruit than doing things the way we want to.

RE : /// The disunity in the church over eschatological matters arose when Israel was replaced in the thinking of the church.///

That is one of the few consistent views we find in the early part of Church History.
The view that the Church is the Israel of God is consistently taught from the early pre nicene writings through the reformers including the early anabaptist.

And than came the postmillennialist views of the revivalist : whom believed that Romans 11:26 : " And so all Israel shall be saved"
was referring to Israel of the flesh. They also believed that Romans 11:25 : "the fulness of the Gentiles be come in." literally meant that "most" of the Gentiles would be converted and saved through the revivales and than once that fulness was accomplished than all of Israel of the flesh would be saved.

edit : add for clarity

changed "all" to "most"

In places Paul still used the word Israel to describe unbelieving Israel so the word in the New Testament is not a automatic synonym for the church.

If the church is now the Israel of God how does that nullify the fact that Christ will return to Jerusalem from whence He ascended from and promised to return to? Will the church stop being the Israel of God if this happens?

RE : /// Again I ask. What are your scriptural proofs that one can take the mark during the tribulation and still repent and be saved?///

Whom in this forum made that claim ?

I am not aware of anyone whom was in agreement with JM on that statement.

//What are the scriptural proofs that one can take the mark of the beast during the tribulation and still repent and be saved?//

What are your scriptural proofs that the mark is a literal tattoo, chip or whatever?

The other mark mentioned previously in Revelation is not literal.

On what basis, other than Hal Lindsey and the Left Behind books, do you prove this mark is a literal mark?

Bro Docs

I am simply pointing out what I am finding of church history on the subject.

RE : /// ...Will the church stop being the Israel of God if this happens?///

I take these verse's literal : 2 Peter 3:10

10But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? 13Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

add : I would recommend this a good refutation of John MacArthur's eschatology :
Tim Conway of Grace Community Church on July 24, 2015

Topic: End Times, The Church
Category: Full Sermons
The Bible teaches us that every single promise in the Old Testament that applied to a Jew also applies to us who are in Jesus Christ. The greatest reality about Israel is that Jesus Christ is the true Israel and we only become such by faith in Him.

http://illbehonest.com/who-is-true-israel-part-3-tim-conway

Becoming part of true Israel by faith shouldn't cancel or nullify or change the nature of the promises made to those of Israel who were to become true Israel. I'm a Gentile saved through a covenant made with Israel. I becoming part of and being brought into true Israel doesn't change the promises made to true Israel.

Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

Blaine's question;

"What are the scriptural proofs that one can take the mark of the beast during the tribulation and still repent and be saved?"

If there were a literal mark and a literal 7 year tribulation I'd contribute to this thread. But the fact that both are null and void it's a moot point.

It's like saying, "If the earth were flat could I fall off?" And then what would become of me?

To answer brother Blaine...

The mark, whatever it is, spiritual or literal, seems to be received willingly and voluntarily and may be a reflection of where the treasure is there the heart is also.
Consequently, a friend of the world makes himself the enemy of God. He will thus perish with the world and face the fiery judgement of God and therefore will not be saved and counted among those whose hearts remained loyal to their Savior and their God.

Blessings,

There are a couple of things I would like to address.
1. John Macarthur is not a false prophet, he is not a false teacher or a liar nor a wolf to the body of Christ, to those who say such things, you are in error, sin and very wrongly accusing Pastor John.
2. Taking the mark is not the unforgivable sin, there is one, Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, but this is not that.
3. Jesus said every kind of sin and blasphemy even against Jesus himself could be forgiven. This sin falls under that category. In making Pastor John false you must also undo the words of Jesus by relegating taking the mark as another "unforgivable sin". But those who are students of scripture fear God and would fear to even think such a thing let alone presume to add to the words of Jesus.
4. This accusation hinges on an assumed interpretation of scripture, that being "an assumed finality" meaning that taking the mark would be the end of God's working in their hearts or God would not make any further efforts to bring them to the knowledge of the truth.
5. This text in Revelation can be equally interpreted as the "final outcome if unrepented of". For we know in scripture demon possessed men who were saved, evil kings of the most wicked sort were forgiven and repented and every other kind of sinner given the grace to enter God's kingdom. This taking the mark of the beast is no different in either heinousness or degree of punishment.
For we know John does not hesitate to say " all liars" will have their part in the Lake of Fire.
One need not read much of the Bible to know that liars are as equally doomed as mark-takers for sin is of the same root and produces the same fruit.
I agree with Pastor John. I too do not always agree with his eschatology, but to call him a false prophet is a serious accusation and in this case, I could never stand in agreement with it.
Pastor John would be the first one to teach that God's grace is not shortened by the evil men do ( not withstanding the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit) and has rightly concluded that even in this terrible time of judgment from God that the offer of forgiveness and mercy is still outstretched and can wash away that mark just as easily as any other sins committed by men.

Lastly, please do not read my directness as hardness toward anyone, I too have faults that godly men and women must see and help me to overcome.

I, for one, do not see your directness as hardness!

You say, "I too have faults that godly men and women must see and help me to overcome."

Welcome to the examination table of the SI forum.

I agree with you Marvin.

John M may not always be right, but neither were the apostles.

What do you think?

Revelations 14 (excerpts)

9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,

10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:

11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

I think that is an extremely esoteric passage from apocalyptic literature and any attempt to literalize it and apply it to some future (to us) scenario is on exceedingly shaky exegetical and eschatological ground.

That's what I think.

Esoteric is a very interesting word, but first let us be reminded with this:

Revelations 22 (excerpt)

8 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Brother Blaine: You are making serious assumptions in your interpretation of scripture.
1. That taking the mark is a finality or rather a sin where reconciliation to Christ is impossible. The scripture does not support this, I realize quoting a text and then telling others who do not interpret the way you do seems "biblical" but in this case, it is you that has made the mistake.
The reason I say this is because there are more texts to consider than just this "take the mark and go straight to hell" interpretation.
2. It would be simple to add text to text to validate this claim. I'll use just one to illustrate my point.
Joh 8:23 And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.
Joh 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
This quote from our Lord Jesus can be interpreted just as you have done to the Revelation text. Jesus said if you do not believe that I am he...ye shall die in your sins. There it is...succinct straight forward declaration of doom. But wait? Why are those who have not believed Jesus is "he" that is from above..and many disbelieved many long decades have come to saving knowledge of Christ? Because you cannot link the present state of a man and his final doom without interjecting the saving work of the Spirit of God and the preaching of the gospel. There is nothing in the Revelation text that prevents the entrance of the gospel or the work of the Spirit whereby that man or woman might be saved.
What was absent in Jesus quote in John 8 is also absent in Revelation 16.
What changes everything is the "interim" period where God by his mercy brings grace and kindness to bear upon all sinful men.
3. There is nothing about taking the mark of the beast that has not already been done by those who sold themselves to Satan, or to a Pagan Idol or to Greed or Lust, name your devil; evil men have given their whole life to satisfy their evil hearts by way of Satans ploys.
This ploy does not stand out so great that it overshadows those "liars" or even "cowardly" who will be in the Lake of fire right next to the "mark-takers".
What I am getting at is your desire to show rigid adherence to scripture is taking your interpretations down a side path to erroneous thinking.
Then on top of that taking occasion to accuse John Macarthur for an interpretation that is truly rightly dividing the scripture.
I do not see where you are rightly handling this text, instead, you are assuming an unforgivable sin has been committed where Jesus stated clearly there is only one which is Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.
Finally you assume there can be no "interim" period between someone who takes the mark and an offer of God to believe upon the Lord Jesus Christ. In reality, you are saying this Revelation text in Chapt 16 means all the promises of God to save are null and void. Now you not only must defend the idea that you have an eschatological boundary to the promises of God and you must demand there be no interim period where if someone were to find a bible read it and attempt to call upon Jesus to save them he must reject them. You know well that Jesus teaches us..
Joh_6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. In looking further into the texts of scripture the absurdity of denying such an open promise made available until the return of Jesus Christ does not place John Macarthur with a needed correction but you.

Amen.

I know JM is not popular for nothing, but it really surprises me, that it is just okay to have the mark of the beast after all.

What I know is that their fate had been settled and declared with a clear and exoteric warning. But what quite esoteric is the mark of the beast itself, what is it really, to deserve
such a dreadful condemnation.

Let's not be ridiculous. Nobody here has said it is "ok to get the mark," whatever it may be.

Revelation 14:9-11 emphatically states that those who take the mark of the beast/ worship him will suffer the wrath of God and "the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever".

Some of the things Mr. MacArthur has said may be wrong regarding the mark of the beast, as well as some of the things he has said about those who speak in tongues or believe the gifts of the Spirit are for today.

These things are greatly greiving.

I do believe him to be our brother in Christ who is sincerely mistaken on these points, and not a false propet, not a purposeful deceiver of the people of God.

Rather than condemn him, can we please lift up sincere prayers for him that in any way he has been taken unknowingly taken captive to do the will of satan, the eyes of his understanding would be enlightened and he would be set free.

The path of the legends can be tough and bruising. You will be tailed by nasty controversies and maybe forced to tread spots where even the angels may tremble.