Macarthur's view of dispensationalism

"Chafer's dichotomy between carnal and spiritual Christians was seen by Dr. B.B. Warfield as an echo of 'the jargon of the Higher life teachers,' who taught that a higher plane of victorious living was available to Christians who would lay hold of it by faith. This idea of two classes of believers was undoubtedly an unfortunate result of Chafer's predilection for dispensationalist distinctions. It is a classic example how dispensationalism's methodology can be carried too far.
Dispensationalism is a fundamentally correct system of understanding God's program through the ages. Its chief element is a recognition that God's plan for Israel is not superseded by or swallowed up in His program for the church. Israel and the church are separate entities, and God will restore national Israel under the earthly rule of Jesus as Messiah. I accept and affirm that tenet, because it emerges from a consistently literal interpretation of Scripture (while still recognizing the presence of legitimate metaphor in the Bible). And in that regard, I consider myself a traditional premillennial dispensationalist." - John Macarthur, The Gospel according to Jesus 2008, pg. 40

John Robbins from the Trinity Foundation (Reformed and Covenantal) responded back in 1993


John MacArthur is himself a dispensationalist: "Dispensationalism is a fundamentally correct system of understanding God's program through the ages.... I consider myself a traditional premillennial dispensationalist" (25). This leads him into saying that Christ's Earthly reign was "postponed" because of the unbelief of the Jews: "When the Israelites rejected their Messiah's rule, they forfeited that permanent earthly dimension of the kingdom not only for their generation but for generations to follow. The earthly reign of Christ was postponed until a time yet future...."(118). One stands amazed at such a statement. It implies that had the Jews accepted Christ, the crucifixion would not have been necessary and Christ would have begun his political reign at once. What actually happened--the crucifixion, resurrection, and the Gentile church - are all part of Plan B. Even the second coming of Christ becomes problematic in this view, for he would already be reigning on Earth. But, as Packer's Foreword suggests, the crucial matter in this book is not dispensational theology, but the definitions of both faith and Gospel. And on these questions, both MacArthur and his defenders seem fatally confused. MacArthur confuses at least five questions in his discussion - See more at: http://trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=193#sthash.UyQVueb3.dpuf