John MacArthur Commentaries & Trinity

I don't know if this is the right place to post this so if the admins feel it belongs elsewhere please move Smile

I'm going through the mobile Ed course on the trinity and I was curious what MacArthur's thoughts were and started with his Hebrews commentary (which is 20+ years old now I believe). Long story short and a few google searches later I found the below article which was interesting because MacArthur reversed his position on the eternal sonship of christ. I made a copy of the article and put it into a word document and then put a note in my hebrews commentaries that links to it so I don't forget in the future. I'd link to the word document but the last time I posted a copy/paste from the web I was told that was not proper w/o permission first so I'll put this here in case others want to do the same and make their own word documents.

The article is actually posted twice on his GTY site and oddly enough each article has slightly different scripture reference points but here they are combined w/ duplicates removed from what I can see: Psalm 2:7; John 1:14; John 3:16; John 5:18; Hebrews 1:5; Phil. 2:5-8; John 5:19. The article content is the same though.

Links: www.gty.org/library/questions/QA130/ & www.gty.org/library/articles/A235/

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Robert M. Warren

This is a good lesson for us that Dr. MacArthur models: Being correctable and teachable is a mark of spiritual maturity. I also understand he revised The Gospel According to Jesus after suggestions made by peers (not on the Trinity issue). I do wish he would set aside some time to revise his Hebrews commentary.

Until I read your post, I just didn't think about making some extensive notes on that resource for this issue. I will do so now. Thanks!

Simon’s Brother

Thanks for sharing this discovery from your studies Mattillo.

I don't know if this is the right place to post this so if the admins feel it belongs elsewhere please move

I'm going through the mobile Ed course on the trinity and I was curious what MacArthur's thoughts were and started with his Hebrews commentary (which is 20+ years old now I believe). Long story short and a few google searches later I found the below article which was interesting because MacArthur reversed his position on the eternal sonship of christ. I made a copy of the article and put it into a word document and then put a note in my hebrews commentaries that links to it so I don't forget in the future. I'd link to the word document but the last time I posted a copy/paste from the web I was told that was not proper w/o permission first so I'll put this here in case others want to do the same and make their own word documents.

The article is actually posted twice on his GTY site and oddly enough each article has slightly different scripture reference points but here they are combined w/ duplicates removed from what I can see: Psalm 2:7; John 1:14; John 3:16; John 5:18; Hebrews 1:5; Phil. 2:5-8; John 5:19. The article content is the same though.

Links: www.gty.org/library/questions/QA130/ & www.gty.org/library/articles/A235/

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909922#Comment_909922

He explains that in his Biblical Doctrine book, pages 191-192; or you could just read his entire section on the trinity. But wait a minute isn't eternal Sonship the same as eternal subordination?

DAL

Mattillo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909931#Comment_909931

Thanks dal. Please understand I'm not a seminary student by any means but eternal sonship I would understand as a role and subordination as function. This whole Trinity debate is definitely interesting but I'm only part way through the course so far.

Got questions says: The doctrine of eternal Sonship simply affirms that the second Person of the triune Godhead has eternally existed as the Son. In other words, there was never a time when He was not the Son of God, and there has always been a Father/Son relationship within the Godhead. This doctrine recognizes that the idea of Sonship is not merely a title or role that Christ assumed at some specific point in history, but that it is the essential identity of the second Person of the Godhead. According to this doctrine, Christ is and always has been the Son of God.

Subordination is more hairy as it seems scholars have broken it down further into terms like functional. Maybe someone with more training can chime in

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909933#Comment_909933

Thanks Matillo! I'm studying the subject myself, but I'm trying to study each perspective separately to understand where each is coming from. It's a long road for now, but I'm sure it will pay off.

Blessings!

DAL

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/909940#Comment_909940

Good approach with a topic like this one.

Thanks Matillo! I'm studying the subject myself, but I'm trying to study each perspective separately to understand where each is coming from. It's a long road for now, but I'm sure it will pay off.

Blessings!

DAL