MORNING SPIRITUAL DIARY FOR
3/26/2026 8:08 AM
This morning I will begin to quote from a chapter in
John MacArthur’s commentary which is different from other chapters that we have
been looking at. Let me begin by giving
the title of this chapter, and then write something that is written first in
the chapter.
“EXCURSUS: WHY EVERY
Self-respecting Calvinist Must Be a Premillennialist”
“This
material is taken from a message delivered by the author at the March, 2007
Grace Community Church Shepherds’ Conference.
It has been lightly edited, but no effort has been made to remove the
marks of the original spoken message. It
is included here as an expansion of a theme introduced in the discussion of the
covenants in chapters 9-11 of this volume.
A proper interpretation of the biblical data leads to the conclusion
that God’s promises to Israel will be literally fulfilled in the nation of Israel
and not transferred to the church. That
reality logically leads to premillennialism.
“Is one of the strange ironies in the church and
Reformed theology that those who love the doctrine of sovereign election most
supremely and sincerely, and who are most unwavering in their devotion to the
glory of God, the honor of Christ, the work of the Spirit in regeneration and
sanctification, the veracity and inerrancy of Scripture, and who are the most
fastidious in hermeneutics, and who are the most careful and intentionally
biblical regarding categories of doctrine, and who see themselves as guardians
of biblical truth, and are not content to be wrong at all, and who agree most
heartily on the essential matters of Christian truth so that they labor with
all their powers to examine in a Berean fashion every relevant text to discern
the true interpretation of all matters of divine revelation are in varying
degrees of noninterest in applying those same passions and skills to the end of
the story, and are rather content to be a happy and even playful disagreement
regarding the vast biblical data on eschatology, as if the end didn’t matter
much.
“But it does matter that Calvinist
care about eschatology and get it right—and we will if we get Israel
right. We get Israel right when we get
the Old Testament covenants and promises right.
We get the Old Testament covenants and promises right when we get the
interpretation of Scripture right. We
get the interpretation of Scripture right when we’re faithful to a legitimate
hermeneutic and God’s integrity is upheld.
We get our hermeneutics right, we’ll get Israel right. Get Israel right, we’ll get eschatology
right.
“The Bible calls God the God of
Israel more than 200 times. There are
more than 2,000 references to Israel in Scripture, and not one of them means
anything but Israel, including Romans 9:6 and Galatians 6:16, which are the
only two passages that amillennialists go to, to try to convince us that those
cancel out the other 2,000. There is no
difficulty in interpreting those verses as simply meaning Jews who were
believers, the Israel of God. Israel
always means Israel, never means anything but Israel. Seventy-three New Testament uses of Israel
always mean Israel.
“Seventy percent of Scripture is the
story of Israel. And, I think, the whole
point of the story is to get to the ending—and it doesn’t go up in smoke. So here’s how to get the foundation for an
accurate understanding of eschatology.
Get election right and get Israel right.
Those two go together; they’re inseparable. How is it that we’ve come to get number one
right and totally miss number two so often?
I’m confident that God did not reveal prophetic truth in such detail to
hid or obscure the truth, but to reveal it for our blessing, our motivation,
and ultimately His glory.
“But there is a theology concerning
Israel and the end times—popular in many Reformed and Calvinistic circles
today—that I believe does not get things right concerning Israel. It is replacement theology, and scholastically
it’s often referred to as supersessionism.
This view demands that all the Old Testament promises to Israel be
viewed through the lens of the New Testament and ultimately get transferred to
the church. Replacement theology, and
integral part of amillennialism, also creates a strange dichotomy, since all
the curses promised to Israel came to Israel.
Literally, and they’re still coming.
If one wonders whether the curses in the Old Testament were literal,
they’re going on right now. Israel right
now is not under divine protection. They
are under the promise of God that they
will be perpetuated as an ethnic people, but this current group of Jews that
live in the world today and in the nation of Israel are not now under divine
protection—they’re apostate. They’ve
rejected their Messiah. They are under
divine chastening. But they are still
a people and will be to the end.
“What a staggering apologetic that
is for truthfulness of Scripture. We
can’t abandon that without a huge loss of confidence in Scripture. All the curses promised to Israel for
disobedience to God came true, literally on Israel. And now, all of a sudden, we’re supposed to
split all those passages that give blessing and cursing and say all the
blessings promised to Israel aren’t coming to Israel; they’re coming to the
church instead? Where’s the textual
justification for such a split interpretation?
And wouldn’t we think that whatever way the curses were fulfilled would
set the standard for whatever way the blessings would be fulfilled? Or to put
the question in another context. Wouldn’t we expect that all the prophecies
that came to pass when Jesus came in a literal fashion would set the pattern
for how the prophecies connect to His second coming would come to pass? There’s no place for splitting up these
interpretations.
“Thus the Old Testament cannot be
amillennial. If we affirm a normal
hermeneutic—the perspicuity of the Old Testament—of course it pronounces
clearly covenants and promises and a kingdom to come to Israel.
“The Old Testament must be
interpreted, preached, and taught as clear revelation from God that is to be
understood, believed, and applied by the people to whom it was given. So what did God promise Israel? Look at the twelfth chapter of Genesis, and
obviously this is a study beyond our capability to dig into all the
details. But it’s clear and
straightforward; it’s not difficult. I
want us to see the connection between these covenants and divine, electing
sovereignty.
“Follow the use of the expression “I
will” in verses 2-3: “And I will make you a great nation; and so you
shall be a blessing; and I will bless those who bless you, and the one who
curses you, I will curse. And in you all
the families of the earth will be blessed.” I will, I will, I will—five
times. It is sovereign, unilateral,
unconditional election.
“That’s prophecy. God later puts Abram to sleep and says this
is what is going to happen: “I will
also judge the nations whom they will serve, and afterward they will come out
with many possessions. As for you, you
shall go to your fathers in peace; you will be buried at a good old age”
(Genesis 15:14-15).
“Then in verse 17:
“It came about when the sun had set, that it was very dark, and
behold, there appeared a smoking oven and a flaming torch which passed between
these pieces.” God put Abram out,
anesthetized him, and He alone went through the pieces—a unilateral,
unconditional, irrevocable promise that God made with Himself. There were no conditions for Abram to
fulfill. On that day, the Lord made a
covenant with him.
“It is to be a covenant that does
not end. Chapter 17, verse 7 says “I
will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you
throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and
to your descendants after you.” God elected Abram, elected the nation that
would come out of his lions, made a covenant and a promise with them to be
their God. This is the foundational
covenant in the Bible—foundational, biblical covenant—the promise of God,
unilateral and unconditional.”
3/26/2026
9:30 AM
No comments:
Post a Comment