For those who say there is no Pre-Trib rapture you not only heard Pastor MacArthur's explanation from Revelation the Apostle Paul spoke of the rapture (catching up of the saints) in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, this triggers the day of the Lord (tribulation) as Paul moves into chapter 5 sudden destruction comes upon those in darkness, not on those who are walking in the light. Paul said back in chapter 1 of 1st Thessalonians (9-10) "serve the living and true God, and wait for... Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come."

It's important to note that the position John MacArthur gives here of Pre-Mill is not the historic understanding. He is giving the dispensational pre mill view.

Brother MacArthur, God bless him, whiffed bigtime on a couple of important points: 1) He labels the historical positions of the church correctly then describes them incorrectly. Most glaringly he described historic premillennialism as modern day dispensationalism. The rapture and the future great tribulation were popularized by John Nelson Darby only a couple hundred years ago. MacArthur is the one out of synch with the majority of Christian history, not the other way around, as questioner astutely pointed out. 2) Amillennialists would never say "there is no real millennium" or that they "they reject the millennium." I don't agree with their position, but misrepresentation is not okay. 3) I agree that postmillennialism can be a hard sell. But that is a psychological point - not a scriptural one. I believe in postmillennialism not because I read it in the news paper or because I feel like it or because I personally perceive the world getting better. I see it _by faith_ in the promises of scripture. The Bible does not, in fact, teach that "the world will get worse and worse and worse." Dr. MacArthur pointedly bifurcates the culture war and the preaching of the gospel when there is absolutely no tension between the two. Calling WWII the darkest era in human history is just completely ignorant. How about the flood of Noah that killed every soul on earth save eight? How about the black death that killed roughly one third of Europe? Those would have been difficult times indeed to trust God's promises of a bright future for his people. But we doubt in the 21st century at the zenith of wealth and prosperity. Why? I actually completely agree with him regarding the historical progress of theology. The early church took centuries to develop something beginning to resemble the doctrine of the trinity. Atonement took even longer and soteriology took longer still. The five solas took 1500 years. But that knife cuts both ways. Notice how he uses his conclusion into the premises. The Church is now more mature and hence has arrived at a proper, in his view, understanding of eschatology. How do you know it's not the other way around? How do you know that the church's current understanding isn't due to immaturity? How do you know that there isn't a long glorious postmillennial future of the nations being baptized and the whole earth worshiping the lord of glory in spirit and in truth?

*this is inaccurate.* ...Postmill views began way before the Reformation. Although premillennialism finds slightly earlier development (especially in Irenaeus, A.D. 130- 202), theologian Donald G. Bloesch notes: "Postmillennialism was already anticipated in the church father Eusebius of Caesarea" (A.D. 260-340). Schaff traces it back even farther, observing that Origen (A.D. 185-254) "expected that Christianity, by continual growth, would gain the dominion over the world." Two other prominent church fathers whose historical confidence appears to express a nascent postmillennialism are Athanasius (A.D. 296-372) and Augustine (A.D. 354-430). As Zoba notes, Augustine taught that history "would be marked by the ever-increasing influence of the church in overturning evil in the world before the Lord's return." This would eventually issue forth in a "future rest of the saints on earth" (Augustine, Sermon 259:2) "when the Church will be purged of all the wicked elements now mixed among its members and Christ will rule peacefully in its midst." This early incipient postmillennialism contains the most basic element of the later developed system: a confident hope in gospel victory in history prior to Christ's return.

Have you noticed the recent increase of reformed and post millennial theology? Interesting timing. Since the world seems to be spiraling to one world government and the church is growing greatly an apostasy. 2 Peter 3, 3-5

Regarding recovering certain areas of doctrine like eschatology he said, "they hadn't quite gotten to that yet," but Calvin did talk about hopeful eschatology without having written a commentary on Revelation and the Puritans did give biblical reasons for why they overwhelmingly held to hopeful eschatology. I understand that in a Q&A session it is not practical to present the arguments for an opposing viewpoint then explain why that argument is wrong. What JM did was to give an oversimplified and somewhat erroneous generalization of the opposing viewpoint, then claimed that those who "successfully hold/held to it" have to "not believe what the bible says," and then regarding the Puritans' understanding he claimed "they hadn't quite gotten to that." If by that he means not all the presuppositions which need to be affirmed for one to hold his novel view of eschatology were held by anyone at the time of the Puritans or before, I agree. While there have been historic premil believers who held various views on the timing of a "rapture" in regard to the tribulation and coming of Christ to establish an earthly kingdom and there have been various opinions on the future of national, ethnic Israel (including by some postmil believers,) who ever in church history before the 1800s held all the presuppositions required by premillennial dispensationalism like JM holds to?

I think the only question i have that hasnt been answered yet is why do we feel we have to apoly it to the 21st century church when clearly it was written to the first century church? Am i saying we cant learn anything from the Bible since it isnt directed to us? No. But why do we feel so important that we feel the prophecies could maybe not be directed at us but rather during the 1st century? Also, im not saying all prophecies were fulfilled either. If anyone wants to answer, please do so. Also, as an afterthought, if you go to Isaiah 65, one of the chpters pre mil points to in regards to end times, why are there still people dying and babies being born if its referencing to the New Heavens and New Earth? Just a question.

After watching this video last year, I posted a comment with 11 points: A-K. Just now, I watched the video again and was struck by the statement that to accept a-millennialism or post-millennialism, you have to believe the Bible doesn't mean what it says. Well, the problem with that argument is that, to accept the dispensationalist/futurist pre-millennialist eschatology promoted by MacArthur and many other preachers, you have to believe the Bible texts I listed last year don’t mean what they say: And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. Galatians 3:29 (See Romans 4 and the rest of Galatians 3.) ..he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neigher is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. - Romans 2;28 & 29 ...For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel”: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. - Romans 9:6-8 Dispensationalist/futurist premillennialists also find it necessary to postulate a completely arbitrary “gap” into the seventy weeks prophecy of Daniel 9. Most or all of the reformers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries were historicist premillennialists (a very different method of interpretation than the one MacArther uses). Is anyone aware of any theologian proposing the futurist method of Bible interpretation before it was suggested during the Council of Trent (1545-1563) as a way to counter the protestant reformation? There are some advantages to the futurist method. It allows a more congenial attitude toward Hebrews than the sixteenth century reformers had. There are, however, some serious disadvantages too. 1: It robs people of the way a “plain reading” of the seventy weeks prophecy of Daniel 9 can be understood as one additional evidence that Jesus really is the Messiah foretold by the Hebrew prophets of antiquity. (For more about which search under Historicist Interpretation of Daniel 9.) 2: The futurist method utterly fails to prepare believers for the resumption of the persecution of Jesus’ followers that plagued Europe for more than a thousand years. While I agree that the sixteenth century reformers’ eschatology was incomplete, that is not to say it was wrong. To refer to the puritans (or even many of them) as post-millennial is misleading. Is anyone aware of anyone who promoted post-millennialism before Johnathan Edwards did that in the eighteenth century? I’m not. By that time, it seems most or all of the puritans were calling themselves congregationalists. If there is anybody with evidence contrary to what I’ve written here, please let me know.

well it was because pre-mill dispensationalism was not invented yet. duh

I would recommend “Victory in Christ” by the late Greg Bahnsen as a refutation of Brother MacArthur’s position.

His view of Postmil is very wrong. Not one who holds to the position of Postmillennialism, such as myself, would say we hand anything to Christ. The church are the feet and hands of Christ and it is through the Gospel that people change. It is soley the power of Christ and the Gospel that transforms the world. Has nothing to do with man whatsoever. To say otherwise is completely false and a grevious misrepresentation of the view. Let us keep in mind that Paul in 1 Corinthians 15 states that Jesus rules in the midst of His enemies, puts all His enemies under His feet, and then defeats death at the end. To believe in a rapture of the Church makes the chronology of 1 Cor.15 backwards. That death is defeated first since there are many Christians who have since returned to the dust of the earth and have died, they are raised from death, conquering death and then all His enemies are put under His feet. Sorry but that is not what Scripture teachers. The mountain grows and grows and the world flourishes through the transformation of the Gospel whereby the nations stream up to His mountain and cry out for His Law.

The secret rapture is a very novel and minority view in church history.

It all depends on whether the revelation was written before 70AD or in 96AD. If before, then the revelation had already started, if after then it wasn't part of the great commission.

....the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. - I Thessalonians 4 Are there English Bible translations that translate the phrase "caught up" as "raptured"? If so, which ones?

Interesting. Something I struggle with as a Calvinist is like- minded individuals constantly citing the reformers on all issues, which causes me to think "well, they were clearly intelligent men, so who am I to disagree with them?" This helps me look at things from a different angle. Thanks for the post.

Love MacArthur but i just flat out disagree with him. Still cant help but love the guy.

The question that must be asked is "what is more powerful, the fall of Adam or resurrection of Jesus" and I think your eschatology will make sense.

Thanks for sharing, we’ve recently been exposed to men in a church who said we need to repent because we’re not closely studying and following the reformers.

Apocalyptic literature is filled with imagery. Apocalyptic literature must be interpreted as apocalyptic literature. Throughout history there have been several millenial stories. It would be like saying someone missed it a mile, to say he doesn't know what he is talking about. Matthew 24:36-41 teaches that like in the days of Noah so will Jesus return. During the days of Noah the righteous were left and the unrighteous left. In 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 the word air is just above the surface of the air which would be like throwing a ball in the air.

The return of Christ is quite clearly before the millennial kingdom.

The most clear and concise explanation I’ve heard, by far!

So Christ and the Church fails? The Gospel fails and one of the two people of God need to be saved?

I spoke to the teaching pastor at a reformed baptist church in town and we somehow got on the topic of eschatology and his exact words were this, “Chris, I don’t know anything about eschatology except what I have been told by the senior pastor so I don’t really have a biblical reason for being post trib.” That was shocking, I was under the impression that this held to the highest standards of Bible teaching and yet here is the teaching pastor straight up telling me his convictions are based upon what a pastor told him and not the Word of God. I handed him my outline I made during my Revelation study I did on Sunday nights and the next week he told me, “this really seems to be a lot more clearer and easier to follow within Scripture and I do believe the Bible is clear about the rapture being before the tribulation.”

Pre is the most biblical. I really don't see any exception

Absolute explanation

Why is historical premill often left out of these? I am not a Dispensationalist, but I do believe in a future post-trib, pre-mil rapture. lean towards Replacement theology, or that the gentile believers have been grafted into Israel.

To quote John MacArthur: “Big yikes!”

More of an Amillennial guy myself.

These dispy premil goofballs who accuse anyone who is postmil or amil of being apostates are basically saying the entire church until about 200 years ago was apostate. We can easily dismiss them as not being credible sources of Eschatology, and likely a lot of other issues as well.

The straightforward reading of the text is hard to escape! 📖

That's OK as MacArthur has it wrong too. Christian's need to get it in their heads there is no pre-tribulation. Is has to be read into Scripture as it's just not there. The rapture, if you must call it that, is the Second Coming of Christ.

post trib pre mil (Historic Premillennialism)✝

So, when God told Adam that the day he ate the fruit he would die, did God mean that literally?

I love Johnny Mac but I would disagree that all postmillennialist believe that things are going to get better (NAR).

In the chronology he gave, he conveniently jumps over Satan being loose and attempting to do war.

Reformed Amillenialism says Christ reigns now as prophet priest and king and will come back to judge the world and consummate His kingdom at the end

Jesus comes back 2x according to MacArthur Amilleniallism doesn't reject the millennium, they believe the millennium is now Jesus is ruling and reigning from Heaven through his Church through the hearts of his people. The Millennium is the time period between the 1 & 2 comings of Jesus. None of the NT authors mention a literal 1000yrs and they all understood when Jesus comes back its to judge his enemies and to usher in his eternal reign

The further we go away from Catholicism the more we reform Christianity in all points and return to just what the Bible teaches instead of what a denomination hierarchy teaches Salvation points Sanctification points Ecclesiology points Eschatology points So yes, it took a couple centuries to reform further and further and get closer back to the Bible

As a Molinist with nearly zero eschatological experience (initially came to Christianity through a pre-trib rapture watch-group) I genuinely don't know what to do with this area of theology. I have highly Calvinistic friends who only quote James White and Jeff Durbin for all of their views, and yet I experientially know the pre-trib rapture view WHILE ALSO currently not believing in the rapture, period. What would be some helpful contexts as far as eschatology goes that I may benefit from? help!!!

No one saw the 'truth' until J.N. Darby invented it? Are we really to interpret the Word of God by what we see around us? Is that how Abraham believed God? How many peoples of God are there? Does God have two different programs, or one program through the ages, developing from Israel, and then fulfillment through Christ to the nations? Have we really improved upon the Puritans, or are they examples to us?

When I hear of Covenant believers say they want to dismantle dispensational theology, I wonder if it means taking on John MacArthur- or are we just going after a small back porch Baptist church that they want to take on because of their church sign?

What about Rev 20:5-6? If the dead aren’t raised until after the millennium and the dead are raised first then we are caught up in the air w them , isn’t the rapture after the millennium? That’s what rev 20 says specifically this is the first resurrection

I encourage Dr. John MacArthur to let Scripture speak for itself and let it shape his belief system on Eschatology and not the other way around, This is very important because he teaches others. Post Millennialism is a hard sell for him. But praise God because He is the God of the impossible! It just makes me wonder if Dr. MacArthur really believes in the power of the Gospel as much as the Apostle Paul did? 🤔

I'm a pretribulation guy, but to be fair to amillennials, there are numbers in Revelation that are figurative. The 144,000 in Rev 7, for example. There are also places in the Bible where 1000 is figurative, like Deut 7:9. I'm more than willing to admit my view of the end times could very well be wrong, but I trust in Jesus!

You can be involved in the culture war, standing for truth and righteousness, without having anything to do with postmillenialism.

Postmill or let them be anathema

I am an independent fundamental pre-millennial missionary reformed baptist.

Before people could read and write they were taught orally. The same thing is done in about 2/3 of the world. Ahwile back I read about a few Christians who multiplied themselves by about 1,000 in less than five years. The Bible does not teach complex theologies. Jesus and Paul never taught complex theologies. Complex theologies are always the work of man. There is a video on KZfaq titled "7 Marks Of A Questionable Doctrinal System | Leighton Flowers | Calvinism | Soteriology 101" That video is an excellent video that shows 7 markers of a complex theology that nobody could follow without confusion.

many pastors simply follow tradition and what they were told rather than caring enough to study this for themselves. there is also denominational pressures and politics to conform. i got chased out of a church and scapegoated by a "reformed" elder who found out i was dispensational.

I am postmill. Dispensationalism is not biblical. This is one of the things I disagree with John about. Christ is King today, Christ ascended into heaven and was crowned. We don't have a loser ideology, Christ and his kingdom is already growing. Like a mustard seed. John basis his ideology on when they believe the book of revelation was written.

MacArthur is a great teacher and longtime faithful to the Word. However I just flatly disagree on the eschatology. I believe Scripture is very clear that Christ is reigning on His throne now and has been since ascension and will continue until all His enemies are put under His feet. I Cor 15. The last enemy to be defeated is death itself which naturally means the final resurrection of both just and unjust occurs on the last day of history, not a 1000 years before for believers which if so would mean death would not be the very last enemy. The great commission will succeed in history, i.e. all the nations will be discipled, the kingdom starts small and grows over a very long period of time. Isaiah 9 tells us "of the INCREASE of His government and peace there will be no end" So if regional or world wars really break out, God is sovereign and He uses that to bring judgements against wicked people and nations (like the USA and Nato), and redemptive judgements all to bring enemies under the feet of Christ, and more importantly prepare fields for great harvests. So when a premil rapture doesn't occur, let's engage in the long term mission to be salt and light to millions of people who will be in great despair, without God or hope in a country collapsing, with war, famine, high inflation people will need to hear the good news of salvation. We might still be in the early to middle stage of the new covenant age so we need to be thinking about grandchildren, great grandchildren, great great..and so on. We are not in the "last days" as several NT verses state. That was about the last days of the old covenant which ended in 70AD with destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. That's why the NT spoke of being soon and imminent because they were talking about Jesus returning in judgement in the first century before that generation passed (Matthew 24:34). The words "Coming of the Lord" language doesn't only mean the second coming at end of history. Most often in NT it meant judgement on Jerusalem in 70AD. I take hope from the last part of this verse where righteousness follows judgement. "For though your people Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will return. Destruction is decreed, overflowing with righteousness. Isaiah 10:22 Although things look bleak in many areas right now, that in no way means we must be at the end. Almost every generation people have been saying that same thing that they were close to the end. Eventually all "swords" will give way to plowshares.

A Millennium Puzzle to solve… Will Christ be conducting funeral services for mortals killed in accidents 500 years after His Second Coming? The “first resurrection” in Rev. chapter 20 is not the first bodily resurrection in the Book of Revelation, because the two witnesses are resurrected from the dead in chapter 11. There are two different types of resurrection in John chapter 5. There is a spiritual resurrection from the dead in John 5:24, and a bodily resurrection from the dead in John 5:28-29. Does your view of the Millennium agree with what Paul said in 2 Thess. 1:7-10, when Paul said Christ returns in "flaming fire" taking vengeance on those who do not obey the Gospel? The fire comes at the end of Rev. chapter 20. Does your view agree with what Peter said in 2 Peter 3:10-13, when Peter said this earth is going to burn and "dissolve" when He comes as a thief on the day of the Lord? The fire comes at the end of Rev. chapter 20. Does your view agree with what Paul said in 2 Tim. 4:1, when Paul said both the living and the dead will be judged at His appearing? The time of the judgment of the dead, with reward for some and destruction for others is found in Rev. 11:18, right after the 7th trumpet, which is the last trumpet in the Bible. (This verse also proves the Book of Rev. is not in chronological order.) The judgment of the dead is also found at the end of Rev. chapter 20. Does your view agree with what Jesus said in Matt. 25:31-46, where He described the judgment of the sheep and goats, which leaves no mortals alive on the planet at the end of the passage? There are also no mortals left alive on the planet at the end of Rev. chapter 19. Does your view agree with Peter in 2 Pet. 2:4, and Jude in Jude 1:6, when they both said wicked angels are already in chains of darkness? Does your view agree with what John recorded in Rev. 9:1-2, when an angel comes down from heaven with a key to unlock the pit, which means the pit was locked before that time? Are there wicked angels already in the pit in Rev. 9:11? John recorded angels already "bound" in Rev. 9:14. The beast "ascends" out of the pit in Rev. chapter 11, which means the beast was in the pit before that time. Take all of the above and compare it to the symbolic language found in Rev. chapter 20, and the fact the Book of Revelation is not in chronological order, and you will have the truth. ====================== Multiple Second Coming Visions in Revelation: (book not in chronological order ) Christ returns at the end of Revelation chapter 6, with signs in the sun, moon, and stars, as are found in the Olivet Discourse. Those at the end of the chapter are hiding from the wrath of the Lamb. Why would they be hiding if Christ is not present? The "kings", "captains", "might men", "free", and "bond" are also found in chapter 19 at the return of Christ. He returns at the 7th trumpet, which is the last trumpet in the Bible, and the time of the judgment of the dead in Revelation 11:15-18. The beginning of chapter 12 is a history lesson containing the fall of Satan, and the birth and death of Christ, who is the seed promised to crush the head of Satan in Genesis 3:15. The Second Coming is found in the "harvest" of chapter 14, which is related to the parable of the wheat and tares in Matthew chapter 13. He comes as a thief at Armageddon, and we find the greatest earthquake in history in chapter 16. This occurs when the 7th angel pours out his vial. How powerful is an earthquake which moves islands and destroys the mountains? What is happening to the planet? He comes on a horse in chapter 19. Chapter 20? Does He come with the fire, and the judgment of the dead at the end of chapter 20, which agrees with what Paul said in 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, and 2 Timothy 4:1? (The time of the judgment of the dead is also found in Revelation 11:18.) There are no mortals left alive on the planet at the end of Matthew 25:31-46. Why does an angel come down from heaven with a key to unlock the bottomless pit in Revelation 9:1-2, if the pit was not already locked before that time? Revelation 9:14 proves some of the angels were previously bound in some manner. Because the two witnesses were bodily resurrected from the dead in Revelation 11, the "first resurrection" at the beginning of Revelation 20 is not the first bodily resurrection in the book. The principle of "Recapitulation" means there are multiple visions of His return. ==================== New Covenant Whole Gospel: Let us now share the Old Testament Gospel found below with the whole world. On the road to Emmaus He said the Old Testament is about Him. He is the very Word of God in John 1:1, 14. Awaken Church to this truth. Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by husband unto them, saith the LORD: Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. Is the most important genealogy in the Bible found in Matthew 1:1 (Gal. 3:16)? Is God's Son the ultimate fulfillment of Israel (John 1:49)? Why has the modern Church done a pitiful job of sharing the Gospel with modern Orthodox Jews? Why would someone tell them they are God's chosen people and then fail to share the Gospel with them? Who is the seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3:15? Who is the "son" in Psalm 2? Who is the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53? Who would fulfill the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34? Who would fulfill the timeline of Daniel chapter 9 before the second temple was destroyed? Why have we not heard this simple Old Testament Gospel preached on Christian television in the United States on a regular basis? Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and Hebrews 12:22-24, man-made Bible doctrines fall apart. Let us now learn to preach the whole Gospel until He comes back. The King of Israel is risen from the dead! (John 1:49, Acts 2:36) We are not come to Mount Sinai in Hebrews 12:18. We are come instead to the New Covenant church of Mount Zion and the blood in Hebrews 12:22-24. Watch the KZfaq videos “The New Covenant” by David Wilkerson, or Bob George, and David H.J. Gay.

It should be "Why the reformers got the gospel completely wrong". With Martin Luther's man-made definition of Sola fide, we're saved by Faith Alone Luther says, When the Bible literally says we're not saved by faith alone🤦🏻‍♂️ No wonder Martin Luther wanted to throw out the book of James. Everybody talks about how Martin Luther moved the 7 Apocrypha books @ the end of his German OT canon, separating them to their own spot @ the end of the OT. But no one talks about the 5 NT books he wanted to remove to, completely out the NT canon. Imagine if Luther removed 5 NT books out of the canon, would Protestants still put Luther on a pedestal🤔 not knowing he still moved the NT books he didn't like either, to the back of his NT German bible. So it wasn't only the Apocrypha/deuterocanonical books. But for 1600 years straight Martin Luther's definition of Sola fide, was never taught throughout all Antiquity. But Martin Luther comes around and says all the church fathers were all erroneous, really everybody was wrong except for him, only Luther was right. 🤔 Protestants can't see this is exactly what the gnostics did in the 1st century. Some people don't believe there's an evil spiritual world, but protestantism shows the devil does really exist, in the spiritual of this world, that is his kingdom 2 Corinthians 4:4; deceiving people making them believe the lie that the first century Church failed, as if our God isn't powerful enough to convict men in his church to teach the true Gospel, through the Holy Spirit John 16:12-14. Bc the says the complete opposite 💯 How can people be so be blind, not to see that this man just created a whole new gospel, it's because the devil is real and has blinded protestants for 500 yrs. And the more you believe the lies, God hands u over to a reprobate in mind💯

John Mac is a VERY strange mix of Calvinism, Baptist and Dispensationalists. I find him confused, and inconsistent. He quotes a verse. From Revelation chapter one but ignores the next verse. “For the time is at hand” I am constantly mystified as to how Dispensationalists are so locked in to their view that they cannot see any other.

I remember when I used to take MacArthur's teachings as truth. That was before I decided to read through Revelation from beginning to end. To my shock, it wasn't chronological like John teaches. Chapter after chapter, the history of the Church kept being retold, and the Return of Christ kept reoccurring, and the harvest and the judgment of men kept repeating, and the 7th Trumpet kept blowing, and the saints kept showing up in heaven over and over again. The Apostle tells the story of the history of the church to the Return of Jesus, to the resurrection, to the eternal Kingdom, seven times, from seven different angles, for instance: Rev Chapter 10, Christ returns as the 7th trumpet sounds, the Church is resurrected. Rev 11:15 The 7th trumpet sounds, the Saints are resurrected again, and the nations of the world are the Lord's forever - not for 1000 years. Rev 14:14-20 The second Coming of Jesus, and the resurrection of all the dead (just and unjust) followed by the judgment. Rev 20 is the general resurrection of both just and unjust, and the judgment of the saints and the wicked. How is it possible, MacArthur keeps teaching the Book is chronological telling one story from beginning to end? False teacher. I don't believe he's even read it.

It seems even John MacArthur gets the historic view of Premil wrong. The historic view of premil.never taught a rapture of the church but they would go through tribulation. John is pushing his eschatological view on a view that never taught it. Dispensational Premil is only been around for the past 500 years if that.

I am a Dispensational Pre Trib Calvinist! Very rare it seems...!

"You have to say it doesn't mean what it says" So if you don't agree the the millennium is a literal one thousand years, you have to say it (revelation) doesn't mean what it says! In Revelation 19:15 does Jesus really, literally, have a sword coming out of his mouth? Because, if you don't say that its a literal sword, you have to say it doesn't mean what it says! Its a genuine question.

Mcartur is in total ERROR

All hell has already broke loose...what happens to the heathens during the thousand year reign? Everyone becomes saved. All Jews.

Pretrib and postmillenialism are errors on the opposite end. The antichrist can't make war on the saints (Revelation 13) if everyone is raptured.

Why would Christ establish the millennium on earth for only 1000 years? Clearly it’s symbolic 😊

I don’t know how any man can speak with any authority on eschatology. I will just wait and see what happens.

Every theological camp has to interpret some passages symbolically. Even Premillennial dispys. Does that mean they don’t believe the Bible means what it says? Lol

The confusion about eschatology is mostly people just not reading or understanding the bible. Premil is clearly what the bible is telling us for anyone who studies and understand the bible. It's literally spelled out in the text.

How many times is he going to misrepresent postmillenialism?

That is the WORST eschatological misreading of revelation. Ill demonstrate… Matthew 24:37-40 For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. [38] For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, [39] and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. [40] Then two men will be in the field; one will be taken and one left. In the days of Noah who was taken??? If we keep in mind noah and the conjunction offered, “so will be the coming of the Son of Man.”…In the field who was taken??? To say evil taken in one and the saved in another, why would Jesus create 2 narratives??? Whats his thinking here??? Furthermore, why does John use immanent language in Revelation? Revelation 1:1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must SOON take place. Revelation 1:3 Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written in it, for the time is NEAR. If we are going to say a day to 1000 and 1000 to a day, how do we qualify that statement? Is that how John qualified Time?? As i understand, this is God thinking alone.

Isn't it obvious that the millennial kingdom is the one Christ said he brought with him while in the incarnation? Satan lost his power to deceive all the nations except Israel, and Christ took the right-hand seat next to the father and received his kingdom (his inheritance.) Thus so Satan was bound so Christ could start to disciple all nations. not just Israel. Is that not exactly what happened? I love John Macarthur, but his hold to his tradition of Dispensationalism is obvious.

I find it troubling that John Macarthur is mischaracterizing Amillenialist's belief about the 1,000 years. As intelligent as he is and as biblical as he is, this is shocking to me. Voddie Baucham explains the Amillenialist view very well. Baucham says your view of eschatology stems from how you interpret Revelation chapter 20; as either literal or symbolic. John tells us in chapter 1 that some of the language he is using is symbolic in nature. The Amillenialist believes that the 1,000 years is symbolic, not that it doesn't occur. The Amillenialist view is that the 1,000-year reign of Christ refers to the period between his first coming and his second coming. In other words, RIGHT NOW. Christ is reigning NOW. Also, John Macarthur KNOWS this. And yet, he still makes the claim that Amillenails believe there is no 1,000-year reign. So I'm not sure what the deal is here. By the way, I'm not fully convinced yet about either of the 3 positions on eschatology. I'm still reading the Bible and learning for myself. Just saying that Voddie Baucham made a compelling case for Amillenialism.

when people get eschatology wrong and choose post-mill isn’t it heresy? It’s almost the same as the Jews who wanted the messiah to overthrow Rome so they rejected Christ

🤦‍♂️

Premillennialism is prophesied in the Old And New Testament but there is not even one biblical verse that clearly supports rapture of the Church before great tribulation of last days. Also the early church fathers of the 2nd century as far as I am aware didn’t teach a pretrib rapture . The early church expected going thru tribulations before going to heaven. The idea that Christians will be take out the great tribulation it’s a fiction of John Nelson Darby.

A novel Judeo-centric dispensational movement is perhaps the greatest and most subtle deception of our own time. ✔️

As much as I love this man. It is ironic how he claims the world will get worse and worse and yet he is standing there preaching to 1000 people who are there to hear the gospel! Why??? Because the KINGDOM is growing and growing and growing...it is leaven taking over the whole lump...just takes time! If all we see is the bad...you will never see the glorious advances the Kingdom of Heaven has made! There are CHRISTIANS EVERYWHERE...and growing every day! Did John MacArthur and his church by the power of Jesus Christ not just win against a corrupt and Satanic government in his state??? Yet, he claims everything will only get worse. No...CHRIST WILL BUILD HIS CHURCH and the gates of HELL WILL NOT prevail! The world will be Christianized! "The earth will be full of the GLORY OF THE LORD as the waters cover the sea" (Habakkuk 2:14)

What a bunch of BS. Oh I'm right because I know I'm right

Postmil here. Johnny Mac completely skips over all the scriptural language of the events in revelations that were to come SOON. Also the olivet discourse is clearly about the destruction of the temple by 70AD. He didn’t mention any of the things that postmil explains.

It's one of the fruitless arguments the devil uses to divide the body of Christ. It makes no difference who is right and who is wrong in this issue.. 2 Timothy 2:23 KJV - But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.

Regarding Postmillennialism: When we read scripture, the return of Jesus is nowhere described as a peaceful event where Jesus is welcomed back to Earth to conduct the Final Judgment and usher in the eternal state by a mostly "Christianized" world. We instead read of the return of Jesus as a violent and bloody event where the Son of God goes to war against His enemies and includes the rescue of the remnant of believing national Israel (Zech 12-14, Rev 19).

I see no secret rapture in the Bible. This is one area is disagree with MacArthur

The world is getting worse and hard to live in😢

The last person to listen to about eschatology is undoubtedly a dispentional premillennialist. I thank God that this false doctrine is dying.

“The world is going to get worse…” as he talks freely to a huge church that he drove to, in his suit, with his dentures, in his old age, as he puts out another bible translation…may the Lord open his eyes to see the blessings around him that post millennialism brought about

J Mac is a great preacher, evangelist etc, but his Eschatological beliefs can only be described as a Joke. His understanding of Revelation simply doesn't exist. 😆

So Mac’s main argument against postmill is summarized “Because we are smarter than history”?

John knows it all...he wrote the best translation of the Bible ever. According to him.

This channel is super sketchy

What John MacArthur is describing here are three INTERPRETATIONS of Bible prophecy. The purpose of the video seems to be to encourage the adoption of one of those interpretations by representing two alternative interpretations as “Wrong”. In the twenty-first century, there are some people who tend to think of their religion as personal - not institutional - and who, therefore, also reject creedalism and dogmatism. If you prefer to study the prophecies of the Bible for yourself, there are a number of things worth considering. (If anyone can provide primary sources of information to the contrary, please provide them.) First, we need to consider several METHODS of Bible interpretation (instead of merely choosing among various interpretations). One method (known as the historicist method) is based on the premise that we should look for fulfillment of Bible prophecies in the past while, at the same time, considering the possibility that some prophecies may be in the process of fulfillment in the present and acknowledging that there are some prophecies that will almost certainly be fulfilled in the future. Most of the people who have used the historicist method in the past have subscribed to the premise that the Christian church replaced the Hebrew people as the object of the Lord’s supreme regard. I rejected that premise in the 1950s but the historicist method can also be considered valid from the perspective that the faith of Jesus and his followers is the true CONTINUATION of the faith of Abraham and other Hebrew patriarchs and prophets of antiquity. A second method of Bible interpretation (known as the preterist method) is based on the premise that most or all Bible prophecies should be interpreted as having already been fulfilled in the past. A third method (known as the futurist method) is based on the premise that most or all Bible prophecies should be interpreted pertaining to the future. A fourth method (known as the idealist method) is based on the premise that most or all Bible prophecies should not be interpreted literally but allegorically. (Which is why I’ve been accustomed to referring to this method as the allegorical method.) A fifth perspective, while not really a method of interpretation, should maybe be mentioned. In the 1920s, my paternal grandfather’s pastor didn’t consider Bible prophecies to be important. In the 1970s, I was acquainted with another pastor with a similar opinion. Hebrews have great advantages. The biblical narrative is THEIR narrative. If they will study the Bible - even just the parts that were originally written in Hebrew rather than the traditional rabbinical interpretations of the Bible - I think it will be easier for Hebrews than for non-Hebrews to have faith in their Messiah. Which is why I expect and pray that, before Christians are caught up to meet the Lord in the air, a higher percentage of Hebrews than non-Hebrews will receive the faith of Abraham and, therefore, will be caught up at that time. A. The first articulation of the gospel of which we have any record (the protoevangelium) is found in Genesis 3:15. We don’t have a record of how much the Lord explained to Adam and Eve about the symbolism of being clothed with the “skins” of animals but I imagine he almost certainly explained something about substitutionary atonement in connection with the first killing of animals for that purpose. B. Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. I don’t consider the grace of Adam’s day or the grace of Noah’s day to be any different than the grace available to us today. C. The gospel was preached to Abraham. Again, Moses doesn’t specify how much of the gospel was preached to Abraham but I imagine that Abraham taught his children as much as he understood about that. D. Jacob didn’t become Israel until after his close encounter with the Lord. (See Genesis 32:22-30 especially verse 30.) I believe any person - Hebrew or not - becomes an Israelite in that same way - by prevailing with the Lord to receive the blessings promised to Abraham, Isaac and Israel. (See also Ruth 1:16.) E. I believe SOME Bible prophecies are unconditional (those relating to the redemption of our planet and the ultimate restoration of Earth to its edenic state). Deuteronomy 28, Jeremiah 18 and the book of Jonah seem to indicate that SOME promises and prophecies are conditional. F. Some confusion with regard to Bible prophecy is the result of a failure to understand the origins of the terms, “Hebrew”, “Israel/Israelite” and “Jew/Jewish”. Moses, for example, wasn’t a Jew. He wasn’t from the tribe of Judah or the kingdom of Judah. Moses was from the tribe of Levi. G. At least some of the restoration prophecies were written during or before the sixth century and were fulfilled after the Babylonian captivity. H. Jesus said, “Before Abraham was, I am.” The people who heard him say that realized he was claiming to be the God of Moses. (Compare Exodus 3 and John 8.) If Jesus is the God of Moses, that means he, before his incarnation, created life on this planet and spoke from Mt. Sinai. I. He couldn’t speak his law in thundertones from the mountain without illustrating the gospel - his sacrifice and his ministry as our great high priest - in the “sandbox” at the foot of the mountain. (See Psalm 85:10.) J. Events in the first century A.D. can (and I think should) be understood as corresponding to the seventieth week of the seventy weeks prophecy of Daniel 9. K. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. Galatians 3:29 (See Romans 4 and the rest of Galatians 3.) ..he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neigher is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. - Romans 2;28 & 29 ...For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel”: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. - Romans 9:6-8

READ your history. The world has actually gotten better since the resurrection of Christ till now. The Bible does not say the world will get worse and worse.

Dude keeps blowing right past the short season after the 1000 year reign. Now, now…play fair. What you sow, that shall you reap.

Amillennialism for the win

He's really confusing his followers so they will still be trapped into believing the pre tribulation lie! His definition of after tribulation is so wrong its unbelievable!

It's almost as if the church had it's chance at post millennialism. We call that period the dark ages.

Wrong, john. Your chronology of the book of the revelation does not support your narrative of a secret rapture, except for an inferential insertion into the text. There is no secret rapture as darby, scofield, etc, imply. And, most assuredly, NOT All pre-mills believe in a 7 year tribulation, following a secret “rapture,” but we do believe that we will all be “transformed-changed “from mortal to immortal, from corruptible to incorruptible” AT the resurrection/rapture WHEN and AT His actual NOT secret Return/Parousia! As in 1 Corinthians; chap15, clearly explains “At the Last trump (ie; the furthest one out)! There are NOT 2 Second Comings - that’s Absurd! - Could the problem be, that you’ve already probably made millions writing books presenting a false view to which you now MUST Be fully committed and from which you are therefore now unwilling to detract? . . . Hmm, yes, I think so.

Almillennial is heresy