I thought my question was self explanatory, they make a charge against these men, but provide no evidence for that charge.
In regards to John MacArthur and Walter Martin, never heard of the other guy.
The charge appears to be correct in all cases, although in the case of MacArthur he later changed his mind. Protestant teachings tend to flip flop.
QUOTE
In 1983,
MacArthur first published his belief in the doctrine of “incarnational sonship.” In 1989, after some criticism, he defended his views in a plenary session of the annual convention of the Independent Fundamental Churches of America. Subsequently, MacArthur has written that he has reversed this position and no longer regards Christ’s sonship as a role he assumed in his incarnation.
QUOTE
QUOTE
We have examined all the instances in which “begotten” or “born” or related words are applied to Christ, and we can say with conifidence that the Bible has nothing to say about “begetting” as an eternal relationship between the Father and the Son. UNQUOTE
J. Oliver Buswell, A Systematic Theology of the Christian Religion, page 111.
QUOTE
Bringing this chapter to a conclusion, I would contend that the three basic propositions given at the beginning of the preceding chapter are sufficient to express the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. When the church went beyond these three in its conciliar deliverances and added the two additional propositions that the Son’s essence is eternally generated by the Father and that the Spirit eternally and essentially proceeds from the Father and the Son, I would urge that it went beyond the deliverances of Scripture and that these last two propositions should not be made elements of Trinitarian orthodoxy. UNQUOTE
Walter R. Martin, The Kingdom of the Cults, pages 340 & 341
