I read in a comment on some site that
John MacArthur "openly denies the eternal Sonship of Jesus Christ and
declares the blood of Christ to be worthless for salvation," and that he
has done so for over 30 years and continues to do so today. If these were true, MacArthur would be denying clear teachings in Scripture. However, on the issue of the eternal Sonship of Jesus,
MacArthur has changed his belief in 2001: Re-examining the Eternal Sonship of Christ. Concerning the blood, this accusation is completely false, as stated in 1987: The Blood of Christ. Certain individuals took to claiming that the blood Jesus shed was "divine blood," the "blood of God." Since God is spirit, and spirit does not have blood, this teaching is heretical and MacArthur denying it is justified.
MacArthur does, however, teach errors when it comes to
his eschatological doctrine, as well as to his understanding and
differentiating between Israel and the Church. For all his education and
Bible knowledge, MacArthur misses and fails to grasp some of the
simplest concepts conveyed and relayed in Scripture (which is how and
why he allowed the passage of Hebrews 1:5 to cloud his vision of the
clear teaching in Scripture of the eternal Sonship of Jesus). For an
example, see my article Supersessionism. For another example, see my article Revelation 3:10. How MacArthur misses both these simple points is beyond me.
If John can change his mind about his position regarding the eternal Sonship of Jesus, God willing, maybe he can change his mind concerning what Scripture has to say about Expansion Theology and the truth between Israel and the Church, and maybe God will use the letter I sent to John on Supersessionism to do precisely that. Remember, Israel, true Israel, is the Church, and the Church is true Israel, consisting of both Jews and Gentiles, and both Old Testament saints and New Testament saints.