# I Normally Like John MacArthur But His Stuff on Daniel...



## Semper Fidelis (Jul 15, 2006)

...is wildly speculative.

I've been subscribing to his podcasts for about 1-2 months now and am generally edified by his exegesis but, frankly, I find his "exegesis" of Daniel (and then into Revelation) to be _wildly_ speculative. It's almost shocking how drastically different it is.

Those who buy into the whole Dispensational story probably don't notice how many times MacArthur stops at a verse and says "Well, I believe..." and then spends 5 minutes talking about some fantastic story about how that verse refers to the Antichrist gaining world power or some other such thing.

A few observations:

1. The whole thing just seems awfully complicated in some ways. I know now why Dispensationalists spend so much time studying end times: they have to keep going over the speculative explanations to make sure they get the whole explanation correct. I mean it's one thing to go into Romans and miss a few ideas but, generally, the text lets you follow Paul's ideas. You don't have to create a whole side story that needs re-creation in excrutiating detail. I couldn't possibly read Daniel and Revelations again and remember 1/10th of the side-story that MacArthur has said "...I believe..." to. It certainly does not follow from the plain interpretation of the text. It's pure speculation.

2. In another way it seems almost ridiculously simplistic. That is to say that, if the whole story that Dispensationalists weave is so easily spelled out in the way they imagine, then there certainly is little mystery to the Angels and to Satan as he ends up executing the particulars of the story.

"Oh, I see," a demon might remark, "two witnesses are going to be slain in view of TV cameras and then rise again and that's going to convert a bunch of Jews. Well, we ought to avoid that scenario so we don't hasten the day of our destruction...."

Seriously, I was left wondering if Satan was listening in so he could figure out what not to do. Prophecy must have some sense of mystery unless we believe that God compels the demons to act at the appropriate time. If they're not doing this on their own volition then it would seem God would be the more proximate cause of some really evil goings-on in the end times. 

I'm not saying He cannot superintend evil but, for the scenario to pan out so predictably and simplisticly as MacArthur and others state it, Satan doesn't seem that stupid to me to just go along with it.

I guess, in the end, I'm left with a bit less respect for John MacArthur than I had. I'm a bit disappointed because his scholarship is so careful in other areas. He's normally careful not to speak beyond what the Scriptures demand but here his standards just totally fall apart. Over 90% of his stuff is pure speculation. He's better than that.


----------



## turmeric (Jul 15, 2006)

> _Originally posted by SemperFideles_
> ...is wildly speculative.
> 
> Seriously, I was left wondering if Satan was listening in so he could figure out what not to do. Prophecy must have some sense of mystery unless we believe that God compels the demons to act at the appropriate time. If they're not doing this on their own volition then it would seem God would be the more proximate cause of some really evil goings-on in the end times.
> ...



That has always bothered me, too, plus, the scenario itself bothers me. The way the stuff in the Dispie millennium has been described to me, i.e. God is finally going to force the Jews to do it right (the OT ceremonial laws), it sounds like a parent in a struggle of wills with a teenager, than an omnipotent God redeeming his creation in spite of its rebellion. Thanks, Rich, I've been having trouble sorting out what bothers me so much about this. Is there any way to predict the subject of his podcasts? Maybe you could just delete the Daniel ones/

Meg


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Jul 15, 2006)

> _Originally posted by turmeric_
> Is there any way to predict the subject of his podcasts? Maybe you could just delete the Daniel ones/
> 
> Meg


I knew he would be talking about it based on the titles but I listened out of curiousity mainly. I typically spend no time whatsoever studying Dispensationalism and thought it would give me an idea what made them tick a little bit. I was just surprised at how dissonant the ideas were to his general teaching.

I also wonder why Christians wonder what happens after the Rapture so much since they'll be gone. I guess they're just curious to see how all the people LEFT BEHIND are going to fare.


----------



## lwadkins (Jul 15, 2006)

We fallen humans have a great desire to know what the future holds (not only the end, but what happens between now and then) thus all of the new age predilections toward special knowledge, Gnostics and end times experts.
Doubt this will change till we are perfected. However Scripture warns us of our tendencies and thus we should be on guard against them! God has explained what we are prone to, why are we so blind to it when it is displayed in us. And why do we resist when our brothers try to sound the alarm. My answer would be pride. 

[Edited on 7-15-2006 by lwadkins]


----------



## Ivan (Jul 15, 2006)

The same series is being broadcast over radio in the States. Let's just say I've taken an hiatus for the duration.


----------

