The Second Comming

[Bryan]

I just finished Reading "The Second Comming" By John MacArthur. Now without getting into the theology persented in the book, I have a possible issue with it. The appendix of the book includes a chapter from "The Redeemer's Return" by A.W. Pink. As has been pointed out on this board befroe Pink was a dispensationalists turned Covenant. It is my understanding that he wrote "The Redeemer's Return" while a dispensationalists. Is it then proper (if this be the case) for MacArthur to include it in his book to support the Dispensationalists view of the end times, without making any note that Pink's views changed (if they did) from what he wrote?

Bryan
SDG

 

[Bladestunner316]

sorta off subject anybody have a list of the pre-covenantal writings of pink leading up to his theological change.

blade

 

[Me Died Blue]

I would say no, especially if he no where ackowledges Pink's later change in perspective. That would be like an atheist trying to support his case by using an argument by C. S. Lewis from his earlier years, without telling his readers that Lewis has become a Christian. It's simply dishonest, unscholarly and irresponsible.

In Christ,

Chris

 

[Bryan]

Thats kinda what I was thinking Chris. Of course I am not sure Pink's views expressed in the particular chapter quoted did change, but they were used to support a pre-trib return of Christ, views that would have likely changed after he left dispensationalism (I'll have to look into this more). It's kinda disapointing (If he did quote Pink out of context), although I didn't agree with MacArthur a lot of the time (I did agree more then I thouht I would) it was a well written book, he spent almost no time attacking other people's end times view and instead showed why he holds to his.

Bryan
SDG

 

[Irishcat922]

Pink remained pre-mill even after he abandoned his dispensationalist leanings didn't he? Seems like I read something in one of his later writings that he was still pre-mill. Not absolutely sure on this though.

 

[Me Died Blue]

And didn't Pink also remain a credobaptist all his life? I read that somewhere, but I'm not sure where.

 

[ReformedWretch]

I would like to know what you thought of the book and it's theology.

I tend to agree with MacArthur on most issues.

[Edited on 6/4/2004 by houseparent]

 

[Irishcat922]

I love MacArthur as well especially his expositional teaching, but i would never recommend his teaching on eschatology.

 

[RamistThomist]

John Macarthur's book, [i:5ddc335a3f]Reckless Faith[/i:5ddc335a3f], rescued me from liberalism and introduced me to Calvinism. His books on preaching are generally good. However from listening to his sermons on Revelation 19 demarcate my disagreement with him. Anyway, I didn't like it how he failed to make distinctions between theonomic and non-theonomic postmillennialism. And then to my amil friends on the board, you are often accused (wrongly) of borrowing from Catholicism. Aside from eschatology, Macarthur is great

 

[Bryan]

[quote:d826eb2c8a][i:d826eb2c8a]Originally posted by houseparent[/i:d826eb2c8a]
I would like to know what you thought of the book and it's theology.

I tend to agree with MacArthur on most issues.

[Edited on 6/4/2004 by houseparent] [/quote:d826eb2c8a]

Sure. Firstly I like MacArthur, I've read a lot by him, read many sermons by him and done probley a hundread or so of his Bible studies with my College and Career group. So I knew basicly what he was going to say in his book before I got it.

The book is not a book for people into theology. It's written very simply. From reading it, it seems to be written to answer the questions people have who keep hearing about all the end-times nonsense that is being given out everywhere have. In that respect he does a good job of keeping the book simple, easy to read, he has a list of definition at the back of the book and such.

The best thing about the book is that he doesn't attack other's views of the end times very much. He goes after the full-pretrists, but beyond that he spends the time support his position and not commenting on others. It's nice for a change. Now being the "leaky dispensationalists" he is, he puts forward the dispensationalist end times view (rapture, trib, millinum, return of Christ and judgment). He is very careful to distance what he is saying from all the hype of the sensationalist dispensationalist view ala Hal Lindsey. His case for the pre-trib rapture is based on the view that Christ could return at any moment, so if there must be a tribulation before he returns he couldn't return at any moment. Didn't convince me. He talks about the millenum a bit, most of the book is to reasure people abotu the basics; Christ is comming back, you need to be prepared, it will be a glorious day...All of which is good and true, but nothing that I didn't already know and trust in.

So ya, it's a decent book if you want to beging to understand what MacArthur believes, or perhaps if you are a new Christian and have some questions about what you keep hearing about the end times (I wouldn't recommend it for that of course becasue of the view of the rapture it persents, but he does a good job sorting through a lot of the media garbage out there). Definitly not a book for those who have looked into the end times question for any length of time.

Bryan
SDG

 

[Ianterrell]

Jacob,


I noticed people tend to do that with Postmillenialism they confuse it with theonomy.

 

[Ianterrell]

I this probably is because the people I've talked to that make this mistake were Baptists who were trying to suggest that theonomy is the logical extreme of Covenant Theology.