Jesus Christ Is Lord

That every knee should bow and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father!

John MacArthur: John MacArthur: Children Of The Kingdom Of God Part 1

Posted by Job on January 6, 2008


5 Responses to “John MacArthur: John MacArthur: Children Of The Kingdom Of God Part 1”

  1. I’ve just finished watching the video and studying the mentioned scriptures.

    First I want to say, this is a NON ESSENTIAL matter. However anyone feels on the topic is not a heresy.

    I respect John MacArthur and it seems the book mentioned is very popular.

    He said that in 1 Corinthians 7:14, the term used for “sanctified” is the same as the term used for “holy”. I don’t find that to be true. Looking at the Greek text for 1 Corinthians 7:14, I see that the term hagiazō used for “is sanctified”, while similar is not translated like hagios the term used for “holy”. The term used for “holy” is always used in a godly and saintly sense, while the term used for “is sanctified” has many varied meanings and can be taken as a form of cleansing that is not saving grace.

    While a lot is spoken by everyone who speaks on this matter I find that verse tells the tale in my opinion. Children of saints are holy, covered by their parent’s knowing the Lord. Although the child was born into sin and must accept Christ when they are able to reason. And I see the converse as true also, unbelievers’ children are unholy as are their parents, not covered at all.

    When God destroyed an area of evil people, the babies were destroyed too and the only people that were warned and pulled out ahead of time were saints.

    Ezekiel 16 is to Israel, despite their evil deeds, their seed was covered.

    Luke 18 speaks of how we are to come to the Lord, but it does not say explicitly that all children of even unbelievers are saved if they die young. We know there are children of God and Satan, 1 John 3, but no proof that children of 2 unrighteous parents are given a covering or in any way “holy” during their youth.

    We know David knew his child that was born of adultery and died early was in Heaven, 2 Samuel 12:14-23. So we know children of the elect are under a special covering, even when we conceive a child in a sinful act. They who grow to be able to reason must confess the Lord themselves.

    Even under the old covenant children of Israel were covered and children of the wicked were not ever shown to be covered.

    I just don’t see scripture saying children of 2 unsaved people are covered in any way. I can’t compare humans to “lambs” when it comes to saving grace, because animals are not born into sin and Jesus didn’t die on the cross so an animal might repent.

    I may check out MacArthur’s book at some point, but I’m not able to come into agreement with his view on the matter. I don’t know if the book will do that for me either, because nobody seems to have definitive scripture regarding children not born to saints. I am willing to see what else he has to say on the topic though.

  2. Job said

    Independent Conservative:

    So you say that the child of Jeroboam, described in 1 Kings 14:10-13, about whom God said “And all Israel shall mourn for him, and bury him: for he only of Jeroboam shall come to the grave, because in him there is found some good thing toward the LORD God of Israel in the house of Jeroboam” meant that the child was saved only because of Israel’s national election?

  3. It is interesting how God was in “cutting” mode with Jeroboam, but seemed to favor that child. Israel was smitten too, 1 Kings 14:15.

    He certainly was not showing favor to others Jeroboam’s house and making a clean sweep, 1 Kings 14:10! But the child was looked at as “good”. The children of the house of Israel continually were seen as being given to the Lord, as MacArthur notes. So I can only attribute it to Israel’s election with the child being innocent, or some other sovereign act of God to show the child favor. Because many others didn’t get it because of their evil, while the child was seen as “good”. We have no record I’ve seen of children of evil non-elect nations being deemed “good” in a case like this. God would wipe out evil outside of Israel fully if He were to judge them and not deem a single child “good”, again correct me if I’m wrong.

    It seems to make sense that the child was covered under the covering of that nation and having not done evil out of the child’s own reasoning, or just God’s sovereignty at work for just that child in particular.

    What do you make of it?

  4. Job said

    Independent Conservative:

    I believe that this child was predestined to heaven. Therefore, he was born to Jeroboam but cut off before he could be exposed to Jeroboam’s wickedness. An example of how free will does indeed exist and the tension between free will and election, but how God intervenes in history so that his predestination will prevail. For instance, God predestined that Israel would settle in Canaan and become a nation. The might of Egypt was acting against that predestiny. So God intervened in history, smote Egypt, and made an example of pharoah, and His predestiny was done.

  5. Douglas K. Adu-Boahen said

    May I say that I agree with IC that this is a non-essential. With that I would say that the debate regarding children who die in their young age is a subject I’ve never considered until today. You both have prompted me to look into the Bible on the issue.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: