John MacArthur is 'Hard to Believe'

This is a modified version of this post. I have removed a disputed quote from John MacArthur for reason I do not wish the discussion of such to divert focus from the following quotes. If you wish to hear more about the quotes, you may ask me. My email is in my profile.

Although Michael Horton is no friend to Free Grace theology, as he is in the Lordship Salvation ‘camp’, he does make some interesting comments about John MacArthur:

“MacArthur adds W. E. Vine's definition of faith as including even "conduct inspired by such surrender" (173-74). If we are justified by faith and if faith is surrender, obedience, and conduct inspired by such surrender, then we are justified by works. The logic seems unavoidable:

We are justified by faith alone.

Faith is surrender, obedience, and conduct inspired by such surrender.

Therefore, we are justified by surrender, obedience, and conduct inspired by such obedience” (Michael Horton, Christ the Lord, pg 44).

Horton uses logic to assess MacArthur’s position, and comes to the same conclusion we all should: MacArthur’s position teaches works-salvation.

Horton goes so far as to charge MacArthur with teaching an essentially Roman Catholic view of justification:

“MacArthur, it seems, is so disturbed by the antinomianism of his opponents that, in order to make what he calls easy-believism more untenable, he insists that the believer is justified by knowledge, assent, and obedience (or, at least, ‘the determination of the will to obey truth’), rather than by knowledge, assent, and trust. Granted, the formulation is different from official Roman Catholic teaching, but it merely moves the element of works into the definition of faith itself. This leaves the impression that, if a believer is repeating the same sin, he or she must not be justified yet, since ‘repentance is a critical element of genuine faith’ (p. 172) and ‘faith is not complete unless it is obedient’ (p. 173)” (Horton, Christ the Lord pg 40/ References to MacArthur are from TGATJ).

Horton later adds:

“Not only does MacArthur seem here to repeat the Roman Catholic confusion of justification and sanctification; he actually makes the forensic declaration depend on a real moral change in the person's behavior. First, the robe is ‘the reality of a changed life’ not the declaration of a changed status, as the Reformers would have understood it. Second, ‘the son cannot receive all the blessedness of the father's table until he is robed in the right robe. And so there must be more than a declaration involved.’ In other words, God cannot declare one righteous before there is moral change. The legal declaration depends on moral transformation in MacArthur's statements here, just as surely as in Trent's[i.e., Roman Catholic position]” (Horton, 42-43)

Horton not only considers MacArthur’s view of justification to be essentially Roman, he states that MacArthur’s position critically wounds Christian assurance:

“While MacArthur may not intend for readers to come away from his remarks prepared to conclude that they are not Christians because they find themselves committing the same sins repeatedly, I do not think this is an unwarranted conclusion based on his comments” (Horton, pg, 50).

Shortly thereafter he adds:

“MacArthur, as we have seen, not only takes the focus for our assurance off of the finished work of Christ, but even raises questions about the focus for faith itself. Is faith resting in Christ's life and death or in ours? We must be careful not to react to the antinomian threat by driving the sheep back to themselves, away from Christ” (Horton, pg 51).

A Roman Catholic Apologist has this to say about MacArthur:

“MacArthur spent almost all of his 300-page work [TGAJ] exegeting passages from the Gospels, systematically going through many of the teachings of Jesus which specified that works indeed play a large part in our standing and relationship with God. This is not surprising. Catholic theology has always maintained that the Gospels deny faith alone theology most emphatically” (Robert Sungenis, Not by Faith Alone, pg. 597).

“Entrance into the kingdom requires earnest endeavor, untiring energy, and utmost exertion, because Satan is mighty, his demons are powerful, and sin holds us fast” (John MacArthur, Hard to Believe, 149).

How is this not works-salvation?

He states that entering the kingdom is conditioned on earnest endeavor, untiring energy and utmost exertion! Clearly the endeavor, energy, and exertion are not point-in-time events. They must occur over time. It is also important to see that even commitment is not enough! Only the fully committed over the course of their whole life will make it into the Kingdom.

Can anyone else see the radical difference between the Lordship Salvation gospel and the Free Grace gospel?

I am sorry, but John MacArthur is "Hard to Believe"!