MacArthur on the "Essential" Trinitarian Doctrine

[darinhouston]

From... "What essential doctrines should you look for in a church?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyN_S8byRRQ

WIth reference to what he calls the “drive train” of doctrines essential to salvation, MacArthur says:

God - the nature of God. The writer of Hebrews says he that comes to him must believe that “He Is”. In other words, you come to God only when you come to the god who is God. So, you have to have what is called “theology proper,” which is the study of the nature of God…. The second very essential cardinal category of truth.

So, for example, if you deny the Trinity, you have invented a God who is “One.” That is not the true God. You are calling him God, but you are worshipping Satan or you’re worshipping Demons. False gods are concoctions of the kingdom of darkness. So, you have to come to the true God, who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. One in nature, 3 in persons. The God who is revealed in scripture.

Wow! That’s just awful.

[commonsense]

Wow! That’s just awful.

Darin, I second that emotion. I think John MacArthur totally missed the boat has and gone off the deep end!

[luke]

I guess the Apostles and most of the early church fathers didn't know God very well then!

If the Trinity is such an essential doctrine to believe in, why didn't Jesus or the Apostles leave us with a single verse of Scripture that describes it in detail? To say that "if your view of God isn't 100% accurate, then you're worshipping another God" is just preposterous.

[darinhouston]

I guess the Apostles and most of the early church fathers didn't know God very well then!

If the Trinity is such an essential doctrine to believe in, why didn't Jesus or the Apostles leave us with a single verse of Scripture that describes it in detail? To say that "if your view of God isn't 100% accurate, then you're worshipping another God" is just preposterous.

And I guess Jesus didn't know Him very well, either. It really is as atrocious as his early rants against Catholics (with whom I very regularly disagree). And compared with grace I see Paul extending to the philosophers at Mars Hill.... to be a bit hyperbolic, he sort of turns the Shema into Satan Worship.

[dwight92070]

I guess the Apostles and most of the early church fathers didn't know God very well then!

If the Trinity is such an essential doctrine to believe in, why didn't Jesus or the Apostles leave us with a single verse of Scripture that describes it in detail? To say that "if your view of God isn't 100% accurate, then you're worshipping another God" is just preposterous.

And I guess Jesus didn't know Him very well, either. It really is as atrocious as his early rants against Catholics (with whom I very regularly disagree). And compared with grace I see Paul extending to the philosophers at Mars Hill.... to be a bit hyperbolic, he sort of turns the Shema into Satan Worship.

Dwight: I agree with all of you on this one, although I respect John MacArthur in many ways. Early on in my Christian walk (1970 and on), I probably would have accepted what John said, because I didn't know any thing different, not having taken the time to study issues in depth. Now I do believe in the Trinity, but don't see that someone is necessarily lost if they don't accept that. In fact, Steve Gregg convinced me that the Trinity is not necessarily as essential doctrine many years ago. He pointed out that Jesus didn't give the apostles a detailed explanation of it. In fact, I believe Jesus was God in the flesh, but the 12 apostles didn't understand that -apparently until much later, after His resurrection. However, I do believe the epistles are filled with references to the Trinity, as are the gospels themselves. If that were not so, there would be no Trinity doctrine today.

[darinhouston]

Thanks, Dwight. I might only point out that while the NT is full of "triadic" references (things in groups of 3 or referencing coincidentally Father, Son and HS, but not always) - this is not exactly the same thing as "Trinitarian" references. And those sounding the "most" Trinitarian are somewhat suspect. But, I digress (and we've discussed this elsewhere).

[dwight92070]

"For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, so that all will honor the Son EVEN AS they honor the Father."
How do we honor the Father? We honor Him as God? So how should we honor the Son? The same way - as God. "He who does not honor the Son -(as God) - does not honor the Father who sent Him.

[darinhouston]

"For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, so that all will honor the Son EVEN AS they honor the Father."
How do we honor the Father? We honor Him as God? So how should we honor the Son? The same way - as God. "He who does not honor the Son -(as God) - does not honor the Father who sent Him.

This is kind of out of place in this topic. But, did you notice He "gave" all judgment to the Son? Also, I think you're carrying "EVEN AS" a little far here. It doesn't say "in the same way" - that was your words, but even so, there's no suggestion that "as God" was in view, and even if it was "as God" can mean "as you might honor God" or "because he is God" or even "while at the same honoring God" or "while doing so honors God." The text doesn't clarify, so it's at best ambiguous. Not very persuasive.

[dwight92070]

This is a clear example of not wanting to see the evidence that is right in front of you. The author knew exactly what Jesus was doing and saying. Verse 18 says He was calling God His own Father, MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL WITH GOD. He had the prerogative to work on the Sabbath as His Father did (verse 18), He had the power and authority to do the works of the Father (verses 19-20), He could raise the dead, just as the Father raises the dead (verse 21), He could life "to whom He wishes" (verse 21) -life can ONLY come from God, there's no other source for life, and He was given the authority to judge ALL (verse 22) - there is no ultimate Judge but God.
This is why you don't accept that Jesus is God - not because there is not ABUNDANT evidence, but because you don't want to see it. The New Testament is FILLED with evidence.
Acts 20:28 "... to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His OWN blood." Whose blood? God's blood. When did God shed His blood? On
Calvalry.

Even simple math shows us that Jesus is God:

If A=C and B=C, then A=B.

If God is our Savior (Titus 2:10; 3:4) and Christ Jesus is our Savior (Titus 2:13; 3:6), then God = Christ Jesus. There is only ONE SAVIOR - Isaiah 43:11
If A = C and B = C , then A = B

This is so simple that even a child can get it. But then, we have to come to God as a little child.

Dwight

[Paidion]

Wow! What plain and simple reasoning!

If A=C and B=C, then A=B.

If God is our Savior (Titus 2:10; 3:4) and Christ Jesus is our Savior (Titus 2:13; 3:6), then God = Christ Jesus.

A couple of other interesting facts follow.
Since Jesus is the Son of God (Mark 1:1) it follows that Jesus is His own Son!
Also, whenever Jesus talked to His Father, He was talking to Himself!