...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.
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.
