MacArthur’s argument flies in the face of scripture regardless how he qualifies it; he plainly states people can be redeemed AFTER they take the Mark of the Beast.
This is dangerous and damnable heresy.
He disagrees with YOUR interpretation of scripture. Over an issue none of us are very likely to confront. You DO realize that a number of people do not believe Revelations was meant to be a prediction of the future?
I have ZERO problem with your saying you disagree and why. That is perfectly fine. Calling someone a heretic, and claiming they teach works-based salvation, and damning them for being Calvinist or in any other way disagreeing with you? You are not the Judge!
I doubt anyone on this thread would blink an eye if you said, “I strongly disagree with John MacArthur!” I strongly disagree with Calvinists over points I think a lot more relevant than what may or may not happen at some future date in a Tribulation that may or may not be meant as a literal prediction of the future. But I also admit to knowing Calvinists who are saved by God’s grace.
And do not pretend MacArthur teaches we are saved by works. Or that it is “OK” for someone to take the mark of the beast, when he clearly believes it is a serious and dangerous sin.