Looking For Truth in All the Wrong Places - by John MacArthur (excerpt)

Excepted from here. Our comments in bold.

--------------------

We have considered quite a few of Dr. MacArthur's teachings in our blog and have found them to be less than satisfying. 

He spends a lot of time in this article trumpeting the importance of Scripture, more than 1600 words. Yet he can be troubled to quote only a summary of one Scripture and a snippet of another. 

It seems he really doesn't want to teach the Bible, he wants to talk about present-day believers with whom he disagrees. Any thoughtful Bible student would not be interested in what contemporary Christians do or don't do, he would want the biblical case. 

Dr. MacArthur doesn't really bother.

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

-----------------------

(...)

Whether There Be Prophecies, They Shall Fail

It is not at all hard to find examples from church history of groups and individuals who believed God was speaking directly to them apart from Scripture. But surely in two thousand years of history the quest for this kind of personal prophecy has never been as widespread and as pervasive as it is today.

Church history also reveals that since the canon of Scripture was closed, virtually every “prophet” who ever spoke a “thus saith the Lord” has been proved wrong, recanted, or gone off track doctrinally. (Appeal to History. We want Dr. MacArthur to explain the biblical case for his views.)

And since the apostolic era, every movement that has depended heavily on extrabiblical prophecy has ultimately digressed from the true faith, usually falling into serious corruption or heresy. (Appeal to History. We want Dr. MacArthur to explain the biblical case for his views.)

This is precisely why the sufficiency of Scripture—sola Scriptura—is such a crucial doctrine. If the written Word of God truly is able to give us all the wisdom we need for complete salvation, and if it is able to make us adequate, thoroughly equipped for every good work (2 Timothy 3:15–17) (Let's quote the verses: 

2Ti. 3:16-17 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

We find here that Scripture is extolled, but nowhere do we find the idea of "sola Scriptura." And, something that is thoroughly equipping does not mean there is nothing else.

This is the only Scripture presented as proof of Dr. MacArthur's doctrine.)

—then is there really any necessity for additional “prophecies” in the life of the believer? Does God need to say more to us than He has already said? (Well, what does the Bible teach about prophecy? We would think this might be a relevant factor. Why is [was] there the gift of prophecy? Why were those teachings included in the Bible, and why don't they apply today?

Why doesn't Dr. MacArthur explain these things?

Let's apply Dr. MacArthur's logic back at him. Why was there any necessity for additional "prophecies" when the early church had the apostles right there on the scene? Did God need to say more than He already was saying to the apostles?

Or how about other prophetic Scriptures, like Isaiah? Isaiah already had the Scriptures, yet he prophesied and that prophecy was added to Scripture. Did God need to add more to the Scriptures? Paul already had the complete OT, yet he received revelation which was added to the canon. A large portion of the Bible came to be added to already-existing Scriptures. 

So why doesn't Dr. MacArthur's standard apply to the additional Scriptures added to the existing Scriptures?)

This is a question advocates of modern prophetic revelation would do well to ponder carefully.

What More Can He Say Than to You He Hath Said?

It seems particularly unfortunate that there would be such an affinity for subjective “revelations” in an era when the average “born-again Christian” is so ignorant of the objective revelation God has given us in the Bible. (Is Dr. MacArthur referring to the church he pastors?

And once again he appeals to non-Bible issues. Why not discuss what the Bible says?)

When knowledge of Scripture is at such an ebb, this is the worst possible time for believers to be seeking divine truth in dreams, visions, and subjective impressions. (This is a false binary equation. Knowledge of Scripture is not the opposite of seeking revelation.)

The quest (Dr. MacArthur has not established that anyone is on a quest.)

for additional revelation from God actually denigrates the sufficiency of “the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints” (Jude 3). (So Dr. MacArthur claims, but he needs to document it.)

It implies that God hasn’t said enough in the Scriptures. (So Dr. MacArthur claims, but he needs to document it.) 

It assumes that we need more truth from God than what we find in His written Word. (So Dr. MacArthur claims, but he needs to document it.)

But as we have repeatedly seen, ("Repeatedly seen?" We have? When?)

the Bible itself claims absolute sufficiency to equip us for every good work. ("Absolute." That's quote a modifier, not found in the sole Scripture Dr. MacArthur has presented thus far.

We have not seen that the Bible claims exclusive sufficiency. "Sufficient" [enough] is quite different than "sufficient" [no other source.] In fact, Dr. MacArthur himself does not believe the Bible is absolutely sufficient. He stands in the pulpit every Sunday explaining and interpreting Scripture. Why does he do this if the Bible is absolutely sufficient?)

If we really embrace that truth, how can we be seeking the voice of God in subjective experiences? (How then could we read commentaries and listen to sermons?)

In short, I reject modern revelatory prophecy because the New Testament canon is closed and Scripture is sufficient. (The canon does not come to bear on modern prophecy, and as we have seen, sufficiency does not mean "all there is.")

Elsewhere I have delved into some of the biblical and theological arguments against continuing revelation. (We hope that they are better arguments than this one.)

In this context my concerns have to do with reckless faith and the dearth of biblical discernment. (Again Dr. MacArthur appeals to contemporary expressions. These are not "biblical and theological arguments.")

Here I am primarily concerned with the extreme subjectivity that is introduced into doctrine and daily life when Christians open the door to private messages from God. (Again Dr. MacArthur appeals to contemporary expressions. These are not "biblical and theological arguments.")

So in the days ahead, rather than focusing on theological and biblical reasons for believing that prophecy has ceased, I want to highlight some of the dangers we face when we treat any kind of subjective impression as if it were a message from God. This is a vital issue for the church today, and a key component of true discernment. (Wait, what ARE the "biblical and theological arguments?" Dr. MacArthur linked to a book he wrote. Yes, it's only $7.00, but we think we should be able to receive these "biblical and theological arguments" for free if they're so vital.

But instead he's going to focus supposed dangers of contemporary revelation. Hmm.)