# Why Everybody, Hates John MacArthur



## Ed Walsh (Mar 25, 2022)

Greetings fellow sinners,

*Why Everybody, Hates John MacArthur*​
_"John MacArthur is one of the most hated pastors in the United States. Learn why."_

Pastor John MacArthur, is a pretty controversial guy. He has a few views that I consider strange and not from a Reformed tradition. But he is, as Wyatt Earp was said to be, "Brave, courageous and bold." Take a look at this video narrated by Morgan Freeman; well, not really, but it is a realistic voiceover pretending to be Freeman. I can't think of a more unlikely person in the world to narrate a work such as this.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Pergamum (Mar 25, 2022)

I am tired of one-sided hagiographies of flawed men.

Reactions: Like 6


----------



## alexandermsmith (Mar 25, 2022)

To be tired of one-sided hagiographies of flawed men is to be tired of life.

Reactions: Like 2 | Funny 3


----------



## Ed Walsh (Mar 25, 2022)

alexandermsmith said:


> To be tired of one-sided hagiographies of flawed men is to be tired of life.



I'm a kind of "stopped-clock, right twice a day" appraiser of fellow Christians. Or, if you catch my drift, a "whatsoever things are true, honest, of good report; _any_ virtue, _any_ praise," thinker. (Philippians 4:8)

I'd like to know if anyone knows a man who is not flawed. I certainly am, and so is everyone I know. That's the wonder of salvation. The Lord knows our blackness of heart to their very depth, yet He loves us passionately. If you discover a good thing in you, it is only the Seed of God within you (1 John 3:9) If you are given a Spiritual gift, that didn't come from you either.

1 Corinthians 4:6-7​And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another. For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? Now, if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?​

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## retroGRAD3 (Mar 25, 2022)

"Know of a man who isn't flawed"

I know of only one, Jesus Christ

Reactions: Amen 4


----------



## Jake (Mar 25, 2022)

I haven't watched the video, but this is a very strange time to be posting a video like this.

Reactions: Like 5


----------



## RamistThomist (Mar 25, 2022)

I view JMac the same way I view all celebrity preachers. If they do some good, that's great. For the most part, though, I hold the whole operation in suspicion.

Reactions: Like 8 | Amen 1


----------



## Edward (Mar 25, 2022)

I appreciated him standing up to the Kalifornia Kommies. Some of the other stuff, not so much.

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Mar 25, 2022)

Many of us have had a deep appreciation for John MacArthur. Yes, we are flawed. There will always be a story of a fallen minister or ministry no matter how big or small they are. That is why we have Church Government ordained by God. The System Works. It ebb and flows. We have times of revival and times of chastisement. God is always good and Holy and He does rule all things well providentially.

Reactions: Like 7


----------



## Colin (Mar 27, 2022)

Why do so many people listen to MacArthur, this product of all the wrong schools? How can he pack out a church on Sunday morning in an age in which church attendance has seriously lagged? Here is a preacher who has nothing in the way of a winning personality, good looks, or charm. Here is a preacher who offers us nothing in the way of sophisticated homiletical packaging.

No one would suggest that he is a master of the art of oratory. What he seems to have is a witness to true authority. He recognizes in Scripture the Word of God, and when he preaches, it is Scripture that one hears. It is not that the words of John MacArthur are so interesting as it is that the Word of God is of surpassing interest. That is why one listens. 
-Hughes Oliphant Old

Reactions: Like 19


----------



## beloved7 (Mar 27, 2022)

Just got back from some fellowship time with some of the brethren. A portion of John McArthur’s book “Stand Firm” was read aloud and discussed as part of family worship. I’m not privy to whatever the recent controversy is but God continues to use him to bless His people.

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## lynnie (Mar 27, 2022)

I for one am tired of things like a couple months ago when a nice younger women in my church told me she watched a JMac video about judgment coming to America, and how bad it will be (agreed), but we will be raptured out first (nonsense). She grabbed my arm and said "you believe that, don't you?", and got a few choice comments about the origin of the rapture doctrine in 1830 when a lady spoke in tongues at a prophecy conference.

I tried to be positive that the Lord can protect us like he did the three men in the firey furnace; there is no need to be whisked away from it, but she was amazed and stunned that I didn't believe in what JMac was saying, and that I said what I said about the rapture doctrine. ( She has stayed friendly and asked me about potassium iodide for nukes after the war started in Ukraine, so she's thinking). 

How many people is this guy- and all the ones like him- setting up to be crushed and bitter and shell shocked if terrible times come and they are not raptured? I know a pastor who said he talked to a few people from a Calvary Chapel who were angry that the rapture didn't happen yet.

Its just so tiresome and annoying, and harmful to people. I pray for people to be delivered from the false teachings of JMac in this area.


----------



## Eyedoc84 (Mar 27, 2022)

lynnie said:


> I for one am tired of things like a couple months ago when a nice younger women in my church told me she watched a JMac video about judgment coming to America, and how bad it will be (agreed), but we will be raptured out first (nonsense). She grabbed my arm and said "you believe that, don't you?", and got a few choice comments about the origin of the rapture doctrine in 1830 when a lady spoke in tongues at a prophecy conference.
> 
> I tried to be positive that the Lord can protect us like he did the three men in the firey furnace; there is no need to be whisked away from it, but she was amazed and stunned that I didn't believe in what JMac was saying, and that I said what I said about the rapture doctrine. ( She has stayed friendly and asked me about potassium iodide for nukes after the war started in Ukraine, so she's thinking).
> 
> ...


I find it very ironic that the man probably most well-known for his stance against tongues and continuing prophetic utterances holds very tightly to a doctrine arriving from just that (I know many dispensationalists deny this, but I have yet to see credible historic evidence to the contrary).

Reactions: Like 1 | Love 1


----------



## Taylor (Mar 27, 2022)

Eyedoc84 said:


> I find it very ironic that the man probably most well-known for his stance against tongues and continuing prophetic utterances holds very tightly to a doctrine arriving from just that (I know many dispensationalists deny this, but I have yet to see credible historic evidence to the contrary).


I actually did not know this. Very interesting.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## lynnie (Mar 27, 2022)

Taylor said:


> I actually did not know this. Very interesting.


Here you go. Too long for a full copy and paste but worth reading. I trust Lloyd Jones and his knowledge of the events. 



Troubling questions surrounding the origin of the “secret rapture” in Evangelical eschatology – The Prophecy Society of Atlanta



One snip ( quoting MLJ):.... this teaching about the preliminary rapture (“secret rapture”) of the saints *first came in as a result of an utterance, a speaking in tongues, a new revelation* given in the church of the Rev. Edward Irving, and that it was accepted by certain people present.

Reactions: Informative 5


----------



## Jeri Tanner (Mar 27, 2022)

lynnie said:


> Here you go. Too long for a full copy and paste but worth reading. I trust Lloyd Jones and his knowledge of the events.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A good biography and history of this is Arnold Dallimore's "The Life of Edward Irving: The Fore-runner of the Charismatic Movement"

Reactions: Like 4 | Informative 6


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Mar 28, 2022)

The Masters Seminary (pre trib defenders) have an interesting history of the pre trib view, what is interesting is they have very little on Edward Irving 'prophetic' views.


https://tms.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/tmsj13e.pdf


----------



## Santos (Mar 28, 2022)

lynnie said:


> Here you go. Too long for a full copy and paste but worth reading. I trust Lloyd Jones and his knowledge of the events.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for sharing! I grew up in Pentecostalism and I never knew this.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Apr 2, 2022)

Here is an interesting and spiritually profitable interview - Justin Peter's interviews John MacArthur. The interview starts about 20 mins in on this Youtube recording.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Taylor (Apr 2, 2022)

Another video. I think folks _really_ need to listen to this. I have been truly appalled at the church’s unwillingness to follow wisdom in these matters in recent years, essentially just taking at face value every tabloid article released, regardless of the credibility or apparent motives of the author(s), and rushing to judgment without even remotely considering all the facts from both sides. It’s just wicked, and unqualifiedly so.

“The first to plead his case seems right, until another comes and examines him” (Proverbs 18:17).

Reactions: Like 2 | Love 1 | Informative 1 | Amen 1


----------



## ZackF (Apr 2, 2022)

I listened through that the other day. It was helpful. If anything, it reinforces my growing conviction that folks should resist social pressures to give opinions on each and everything in the news cycle coming across their phone. Is Spastic Retweet Syndrome in DSM?

Reactions: Like 3 | Amen 2


----------



## JH (Apr 2, 2022)

Taylor said:


> Another video. I think folks _really_ need to listen to this. I have been truly appalled at the church’s unwillingness to follow wisdom in these matters in recent years, essentially just taking at face value every tabloid article released, regardless of the credibility or apparent motives of the author(s), and rushing to judgment without even remotely considering all the facts from both sides. It’s just wicked, and unqualifiedly so.
> 
> “The first to plead his case seems right, until another comes and examines him” (Proverbs 18:17).


So this is the hypothetical thread that was posted awhile ago? I had no idea about any of this, and would've become aware sooner had not anonymity been deemed necessary


----------



## David Taylor (Apr 2, 2022)

beloved7 said:


> I’m not privy to whatever the recent controversy is but God continues to use him to bless His people.


That's because the recent "controversy" is 20 years old and it is only coming back up due to some very dishonest reporting on the matter.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## B.L. (Apr 2, 2022)

Eat the meat and spit out the bones is what I do.


----------



## RamistThomist (Apr 2, 2022)

I'm not so sure the Proverbs verse applies here, since, as has been noted, Julie's report isn't the first one. The first would have come out when they excommunicated the abused woman. I don't think JM himself is close to the situation. I really don't know how one could successfully pastor a megachurch.

1. I don't think JM supervised an abuse scandal.
2. I think GCC handled it very badly. Not Moscow bad, but still bad.
3. Court documents exist concerning the abuse. Julie Roys may be a hack, but I think the court case is fairly straightforward.
4. I stopped following JM years ago, so I don't really have a dog in the fight.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## God's in Charge (Apr 2, 2022)

I (as most reformed thinkers do) appreciate John M's stand. 
What I fail to understand is why reformed people feel more comfortable issuing rebukes.
Of all of the Christian camps, we should know best our own sinfulness and should therefore correct with greater pause.
Obviously corrections and rebukes need to come. And as a pastor I give some myself.

But I don't think it's as easy as finding something unbiblical and then rushing to the examples of Jesus' rebukes and automatically assuming I have the same prompting from God's spirit to issue a rebuke.
Listening to some reformed thinkers Jesus was constantly issuing rebukes and people as a whole felt very uncomfortable around him. I'm not so sure that's true.

Maybe John MacArthur is dead on. Maybe he's not. I only know that for myself I don't have the freedom to be that corrective that often and be certain I'm speaking for God.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Taylor (Apr 2, 2022)

RamistThomist said:


> I'm not so sure the Proverbs verse applies here, since, as has been noted, Julie's report isn't the first one. The first would have come out when they excommunicated the abused woman. I don't think JM himself is close to the situation. I really don't know how one could successfully pastor a megachurch.
> 
> 1. I don't think JM supervised an abuse scandal.
> 2. I think GCC handled it very badly. Not Moscow bad, but still bad.
> ...


Have you listened to the podcast I posted? It is quite thorough and very balanced in my opinion. The host even confesses that he thinks GCC could’ve done better.

For the record, I didn’t post it so that people will side with MacArthur. I actually don’t really care where people come down. My point in bringing in Proverbs 18:17 is simply this: _regardless of one’s conclusion in any issue_, _even if one ends up reaching the correct conclusion_, to have done so before considering both sides and viewing sufficiently the facts is foolish. And this particular issue, I’m convinced, is far more complicated than many folks are asserting. It seems to me that most folks’ _only_ exposure to this issue is the Roys report.


----------



## David Taylor (Apr 2, 2022)

RamistThomist said:


> I'm not so sure the Proverbs verse applies here, since, as has been noted, Julie's report isn't the first one. The first would have come out when they excommunicated the abused woman. I don't think JM himself is close to the situation. I really don't know how one could successfully pastor a megachurch.
> 
> 1. I don't think JM supervised an abuse scandal.
> 2. I think GCC handled it very badly. Not Moscow bad, but still bad.
> ...


An examination of the facts, something Roys et all like to ignore, is very interesting: https://protestia.com/2022/03/14/judge-julie-accusing-the-shepherd/ 

Timelines matter.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## David Taylor (Apr 2, 2022)

Taylor said:


> It seems to me that most folks’ _only_ exposure to this issue is the Roys report.


Yes, and they should be called out for bearing false witness. The Roys report, not the people.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## B.L. (Apr 2, 2022)

RamistThomist said:


> I don't think JM himself is close to the situation. I really don't know how one could successfully pastor a megachurch.



I am not a proponent of megachurches or even large churches for that matter, but I do see that Grace Community Church has forty elders. While MacArthur is the senior pastor he's not teaching/ruling solo. Sure, he's the "buck stops here" guy, but he is an easy and visible target anytime a controversy erupts, which is bound to happen anytime two or more redeemed sinners gather.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## RamistThomist (Apr 2, 2022)

B.L. said:


> I am not a proponent of megachurches or even large churches for that matter, but I do see that Grace Community Church has forty elders. While MacArthur is the senior pastor he's not teaching/ruling solo. Sure, he's the "buck stops here" guy, but he is an easy and visible target anytime a controversy erupts, which is bound to happen anytime two or more redeemed sinners gather.



That was exactly my point. I highly doubt he was cognizant of all the details.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## RamistThomist (Apr 2, 2022)

David Taylor said:


> An examination of the facts, something Roys et all like to ignore, is very interesting: https://protestia.com/2022/03/14/judge-julie-accusing-the-shepherd/
> 
> Timelines matter.



I don't disagree with the substance of the aforementioned article. I guess it boils down to:

Did the church excommunicate her for not trying to reconcile to her husband?

To which she would likely respond that he was still abusive.

At this point, and I am not a lawyer nor the son of a lawyer, for me it would be in the court's hands on whether he was still abusive.


----------



## RamistThomist (Apr 2, 2022)

Taylor said:


> Have you listened to the podcast I posted? It is quite thorough and very balanced in my opinion. The host even confesses that he thinks GCC could’ve done better.
> 
> For the record, I didn’t post it so that people will side with MacArthur. I actually don’t really care where people come down. My point in bringing in Proverbs 18:17 is simply this: _regardless of one’s conclusion in any issue_, _even if one ends up reaching the correct conclusion_, to have done so before considering both sides and viewing sufficiently the facts is foolish. And this particular issue, I’m convinced, is far more complicated than many folks are asserting. It seems to me that most folks’ _only_ exposure to this issue is the Roys report.



I listened to a good bit. It didn't tell me anything I didn't already know. My point in regards to Proverbs 18:17 is that the Roys, for all of her faults, isn't the first to state the facts. That would be either GCC or the courts.


----------



## Polanus1561 (Apr 2, 2022)

forty elders... without speaking anything about GCC of course, when does a church ever become too big? (if it can be too big)

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## SolaScriptura (Apr 2, 2022)

And I just keep looking at the OP title while wondering, “Why on earth is there a comma after ‘everybody’?”

Reactions: Like 1 | Edifying 1 | Funny 3


----------



## reformed grit (Apr 2, 2022)

Some of everybody think all George Foreman's kids are named George, but not all. One does well to pause and consider.


----------



## ZackF (Apr 2, 2022)

reformed grit said:


> Some of everybody think all George Foreman's kids are named George, but not all. One does well to pause and consider.


I’m old enough to remember Darrell and his other brother Darrell.


----------



## B.L. (Apr 2, 2022)

John Yap said:


> forty elders... without speaking anything about GCC of course, when does a church ever become too big? (if it can be too big)



Just think how many deacons there must be! If I had to reckon a wild guess I wouldn't be shocked if there were 150-200. Lol.

On the "when does a church ever become too big" question, I've often pondered the same. My church has approximately 400 regular attendees and my family is hardly known by those charged with providing oversight. Over the years we have gravitated towards supporting church plants, but they all seem to fold after five years or so.

With regards to GCC, they are in a densely populated area, but I wonder how many faithful small churches are in the vicinity struggling because everyone flocks to the local megachurch? Alternatively, doctrinal disagreements I have with GCC distinctives aside, there are so many churches today that serve up cotton candy and spiritual empty calories that I'm not surprised to see GCC grow exponentially, so perhaps they aren't too big? I'm not sure...mixed feelings on that one.


----------



## reformed grit (Apr 2, 2022)

ZackF said:


> I’m old enough to remember Darrell and his other brother Darrell.


I'm old enough to have a note from Epstein's mother saying anyone who hateth John MacArthur is a taker of life.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## jw (Apr 2, 2022)

SolaScriptura said:


> And I just keep looking at the OP title while wondering, “Why on earth is there a comma after ‘everybody’?”


Struggle: Real


----------



## jw (Apr 2, 2022)

I just think we need more parachurch discernment ministries to pick apart everybody except me.

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 1


----------



## ZackF (Apr 2, 2022)

jw said:


> I just think we need more parachurch discernment ministries to pick apart everybody except me.


Who watches the watchers?


----------



## jw (Apr 2, 2022)

ZackF said:


> Who watches the watchers?


The watchers watchers, dude. Get with the program. There's a secret handshake, too.


----------



## ZackF (Apr 2, 2022)

jw said:


> The watchers watchers, dude. Get with the program. There's a secret handshake, too.


We’re not all KGB.


----------



## jw (Apr 2, 2022)

ZackF said:


> We’re not all KGB.


That’s fair, Comrade.


----------



## Polanus1561 (Apr 2, 2022)

B.L. said:


> Just think how many deacons there must be! If I had to reckon a wild guess I wouldn't be shocked if there were 150-200. Lol.
> 
> On the "when does a church ever become too big" question, I've often ponder the same. My church has approximately 400 regular attendees and my family is hardly known by those charged with providing oversight. Over the years we have gravitated towards supporting church plants, but they all seem to fold after five years or so.
> 
> With regards to GCC, they are in a densely populated area, but I wonder how many faithful small churches are in the vicinity struggling because everyone flocks to the local megachurch? Alternatively, doctrinal disagreements I have with GCC distinctives, there are so many churches today that serve up cotton candy and spiritual empty calories that I'm not surprised to see GCC grow exponentially, so perhaps they aren't too big? I'm not sure...mixed feelings on that one.



One wonder I have is.. how do you have an elders meeting with 40 elders? Practically

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Taylor (Apr 2, 2022)

John Yap said:


> One wonder I have is.. how do you have an elders meeting with 40 elders? Practically


Presbyteries do it very well all the time.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Polanus1561 (Apr 2, 2022)

Taylor said:


> Presbyteries do it very well all the time.


and doing those large meetings every month (presumably) would be heavy, especially when dealing with issues within a thousand member church


----------



## Taylor (Apr 2, 2022)

John Yap said:


> and doing those large meetings every month (presumably) would be heavy, especially when dealing with issues within a thousand member church


I agree. I’m just saying it’s not impossible.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Herald (Apr 2, 2022)

Colin said:


> Why do so many people listen to MacArthur, this product of all the wrong schools? How can he pack out a church on Sunday morning in an age in which church attendance has seriously lagged? Here is a preacher who has nothing in the way of a winning personality, good looks, or charm. Here is a preacher who offers us nothing in the way of sophisticated homiletical packaging.
> 
> No one would suggest that he is a master of the art of oratory. What he seems to have is a witness to true authority. He recognizes in Scripture the Word of God, and when he preaches, it is Scripture that one hears. It is not that the words of John MacArthur are so interesting as it is that the Word of God is of surpassing interest. That is why one listens.
> -Hughes Oliphant Old


Yours is an interesting post. On the one hand, you seem to be criticizing MacArthur and on the other hand, you commend his preaching of the Word. Based on everything I have heard, read, and seen regarding John MacArthur, I admire his dedication to preaching the Word of God. His Grace to You ministry is similar to what Ligonier has been doing for decades under the leadership of the late R.C. Sproul. In the absence of any hard evidence to back up the copious amount of attacks against MacArthur and those associated with him (like Phil Johnson), I choose the charitable approach. Actually, I would be more worried if John MacArthur was devoid of criticism.

Reactions: Like 6


----------



## Andres (Apr 2, 2022)

Not everyone hates John MacArthur. And if anyone does hate MacArthur, then they are violating the 6th commandment and need to repent. I think we can all agree here on a board which has Confessional requirements, that MacArthur is not confessional and therefore we will disagree with him in numerous areas. With that said we should also see how he is to be commended for defending God's word in a day when too many men preach a watered down gospel and are afraid to stand for God's truth. So yes, MacArthur is by all appearances a brother in Christ, but I wouldn't recommend him to anyone because there are too many areas I disagree with him in.

Reactions: Like 7


----------



## jw (Apr 2, 2022)

In Soviet Russia, Dzhon Makartur hates _*you*_!


----------



## RamistThomist (Apr 2, 2022)

Andres said:


> Not everyone hates John MacArthur. And if anyone does hate MacArthur, then they are violating the 6th commandment and need to repent. I think we can all agree here on a board which has Confessional requirements, that MacArthur is not confessional and therefore we will disagree with him in numerous areas. With that said we should also see how he is to be commended for defending God's word in a day when too many men preach a watered down gospel and are afraid to stand for God's truth. So yes, MacArthur is by all appearances a brother in Christ, but I wouldn't recommend him to anyone because there are too many areas I disagree with him in.



Exactly. He is wrong on a number of doctrinal points and is not Reformed or Confessional. Yes, he's done a decent job in explaining expository preaching. On the other hand, his church fumbled on some discipline cases.


----------



## Colin (Apr 2, 2022)

Herald said:


> Yours is an interesting post. On the one hand, you seem to be criticizing MacArthur and on the other hand, you commend his preaching of the Word. Based on everything I have heard, read, and seen regarding John MacArthur, I admire his dedication to preaching the Word of God. His Grace to You ministry is similar to what Ligonier has been doing for decades under the leadership of the late R.C. Sproul. In the absence of any hard evidence to back up the copious amount of attacks against MacArthur and those associated with him (like Phil Johnson), I choose the charitable approach. Actually, I would be more worried if John MacArthur was devoid of criticism.


_Very observant Herald, It was my attempt to curtail the polemic attacks that permeate every MacArthur post. _


----------



## Jake (Apr 3, 2022)

John Yap said:


> forty elders... without speaking anything about GCC of course, when does a church ever become too big? (if it can be too big)


The largest church in my area that is in the broadly "reformed" realm is one that is similar doctrinally to GCC. Incidentally, I have been talking to some folks there leaving and some of their biggest concerns were about how the size was being managed, feeling the the growth was overwhelming the church. Plus, they're very cautious about ordaining men to office (understandably) and they've ended up in a situation where they are more like 7-8 elders for a 4-500 member congregation.


----------



## Rescued (Apr 3, 2022)

MacArthur loses my attention when he starts making distinctions between Israel and the church, God supposedly having two purposes for two different peoples. This flies in the face of orthodox reformed doctrine. It's safe to say that his false teaching on this issue has lead millions astray who should have pursued true biblical theology on this issue.


----------



## Herald (Apr 3, 2022)

Rescued said:


> MacArthur loses my attention when he starts making distinctions between Israel and the church, God supposedly having two purposes for two different peoples. This flies in the face of orthodox reformed doctrine. It's safe to say that his false teaching on this issue has lead millions astray who should have pursued true biblical theology on this issue.


It is obvious to most thoughtful Christians that MacArthur is a dyed-in-the-wool Dispensationalist. But there is no need to complicate the obvious. While MacArthur's Dispensationalism is something most of us on this board disagree with, he believes the Bible is the sole and final authority for all matters of faith and practice. I do not believe it weakens the theological resolve of anyone on this board to recognize MacArthur's love for the Word, even in the face of obvious departures from Reformed orthodoxy.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Rescued (Apr 3, 2022)

Herald said:


> It is obvious to most thoughtful Christians that MacArthur is a dyed-in-the-wool Dispensationalist. But there is no need to complicate the obvious. While MacArthur's Dispensationalism is something most of us on this board disagree with, he believes the Bible is the sole and final authority for all matters of faith and practice. I do not believe it weakens the theological resolve of anyone on this board to recognize MacArthur's love for the Word, even in the face of obvious departures from Reformed orthodoxy.


Has the Christian faith been reduced to this? That as long as a man loves the Word he is to be followed? If the better half of his teaching centers around an erroneous viewpoint then why is he still allowed to have a pulpit?


----------



## Taylor (Apr 3, 2022)

Rescued said:


> If the better half of his teaching centers around an erroneous viewpoint then why is he still allowed to have a pulpit?


“Allowed”? Who, I ask, would “disallow” it, and by what authority?


----------



## Herald (Apr 3, 2022)

Rescued said:


> Has the Christian faith been reduced to this? That as long as a man loves the Word he is to be followed? If the better half of his teaching centers around an erroneous viewpoint then why is he still allowed to have a pulpit?


Did I write that he should be followed? If I remember correctly I wrote that his love for the Word should be recognized. I will add that it should even be commended. 

Why should he be allowed to have a pulpit? I suppose a Dispensationalist could ask the same question of a pastor who is a Covenant Theologian. 

Be careful of throwing out the baby with the bathwater, or for that matter believing that you have some litmus test for doctrinal purity. 

As a Baptist, my Presbyterian brethren and I have real differences. In spite of those differences, there is much that we agree on. There are times when it is right and necessary to debate our differences, but it is also right and necessary to recognize those things that we do agree on.

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 3


----------



## Rescued (Apr 3, 2022)

Herald said:


> Did I write that he should be followed? If I remember correctly I wrote that his love for the Word should be recognized. I will add that it should even be commended.
> 
> Why should he be allowed to have a pulpit? I suppose a Dispensationalist could ask the same question of a pastor who is a Covenant Theologian.
> 
> ...


I can commend John for loving the Word of God. But I'm careful not to adopt the ecumenical spirit that permeates Christianity in our day. The mutual quest for the truth as it is in Jesus is rapidly being replaced by an all-inclusive attitude of a false sort of love that is already leading many evangelical leaders back to Rome to shake hands with the pope. Not saying that this is part of the current discussion, but it seems to be related in a way.

None of us is the standard for doctrine, but if we ask God for ears to hear what the Spirit says to the church through His Word, He will grant it to us.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Taylor (Apr 3, 2022)

Rescued said:


> I'm careful not to adopt the ecumenical spirit that permeates Christianity in our day. The mutual quest for the truth as it is in Jesus is rapidly being replaced by an all-inclusive attitude of a false sort of love that is already leading many evangelical leaders back to Rome to shake hands with the pope. Not saying that this is part of the current discussion, but it seems to be related in a way.


If you really think this is what’s going on in a mere commendation of John MacArthur, even only in a “related way”—all I can say is that is outrageously extreme.

Reactions: Like 5


----------



## Ed Walsh (Apr 4, 2022)

Jake said:


> I haven't watched the video, but this is a very strange time to be posting a video like this.



Hi Jake,

I meant to ask you why you thought it was such a "strange time to be posting a video like this." Well, it's had over 3,000 views and this is post #63 and counting.

I guess somebody thought it was worth commented on.

Ed


----------



## reformed grit (Apr 4, 2022)

A thing may be strange and worth at the same time. Like a smoking pot passing between slain halves of an animal carcass.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Rescued (Apr 4, 2022)

Taylor said:


> If you really think this is what’s going on in a mere commendation of John MacArthur, even only in a “related way”—all I can say is that is outrageously extreme.


It's always an appropriate time to speak much needed truth. Especially about celebrity pastors who are idolized to their followers' destruction.

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 1


----------



## Taylor (Apr 4, 2022)

Rescued said:


> It's always an appropriate time to speak much needed truth. Especially about celebrity pastors who are idolized to their followers' destruction.


Who here idolizes John MacArthur? That anyone “idolizes” MacArthur is hardly MacArthur’s fault. Blaming him for some whacko’s supposed self-destruction is, again, outrageously extreme. Literally everyone here recognizes his theological issues, but the things you are saying are astronomically out of proportion.

Reactions: Like 8 | Amen 1


----------



## Colin (Apr 4, 2022)

Taylor said:


> Who here idolizes John MacArthur? That anyone “idolizes” MacArthur is hardly MacArthur’s fault. Blaming him for some whacko’s supposed self-destruction is, again, outrageously extreme.





Rescued said:


> It's always an appropriate time to speak much needed truth. Especially about celebrity pastors who are idolized to their followers' destruction.


 MacArthur a celebrity pastor?


----------



## Rescued (Apr 4, 2022)

Taylor said:


> Who here idolizes John MacArthur? That anyone “idolizes” MacArthur is hardly MacArthur’s fault. Blaming him for some whacko’s supposed self-destruction is, again, outrageously extreme. Literally everyone here recognizes his theological issues, but the things you are saying are astronomically out of proportion.


Just saying that many young pastors idolize him and just believe whatever he teaches. I'm not saying anyone on the Puritanboard does that, and I'm not saying it's his fault, nor am I trying to judge the man personally. I simply took a reference I saw to him on this site and thought I would submit my thoughts about him. His calvinistic theology and popularity around the world has gained him an audience among semi-reformed Christians. But what he teaches concerning dispensationalism is dangerous even though he means well. I know people who have graduated from his seminary who openly teach that non-dispensational Christians are severely mislead and practically heretics. Please don't tell me the whole John MacArthur thing is not a problem for orthodox Christianity.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Rescued (Apr 4, 2022)

Colin said:


> MacArthur a celebrity pastor?


Yes. One of the most popular preachers among conservative churches.


----------



## Brian T (Apr 4, 2022)

Rescued said:


> But what he teaches concerning dispensationalism is dangerous even though he means well.



Just out of curiosity, can you explicate what exactly is so "dangerous" about dispensationalism? That kind of language suggests (to me at least) that the salvation of those who do uphold dispensationalism is imperiled somehow.

I am not a dispensationalist myself, or at least not in the classical and revised versions, and up until recently I tended to think dispensationalism was just non-sensical and couldn't understand how anyone could possibly believe in it.

However, I have been reading through the following work....






Discontinuity to Continuity: A Survey of Dispensational and Covenantal Theologies: Merkle, Benjamin L.: 9781683593874: Amazon.com: Books


Discontinuity to Continuity: A Survey of Dispensational and Covenantal Theologies [Merkle, Benjamin L.] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Discontinuity to Continuity: A Survey of Dispensational and Covenantal Theologies



www.amazon.com





After reading this, I can at least _understand _where dispensationalists are coming from, and it is not as far-fetched as I once thought it was. I also used to be firmly in the covenant theology camp, but after reading this and other works, I see some serious weaknesses in it as well. I am coming to see that the truth is probably somewhere in the middle of extreme discontinuity (classic dispensationalism) and extreme continuity (covenant theology) between the OT and the NT, For what it's worth. Probably a hybrid such as "Progressive dispensationalism" or "Progressive covenantalism."

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Rescued (Apr 4, 2022)

Brian T said:


> Just out of curiosity, can you explicate what exactly is so "dangerous" about dispensationalism? That kind of language suggests (to me at least) that the salvation of those who do uphold dispensationalism is imperiled somehow.
> 
> I am not a dispensationalist myself, or at least not in the classical and revised versions, and up until recently I tended to think dispensationalism was just non-sensical and couldn't understand how anyone could possibly believe in it.
> 
> ...


I'm talking about the kind of dispensationalism that makes the nation of Israel and the church of Christ to be in two different redemptive programs. The kind that teaches we are to expect Christ to come again and deal with the Jews within a similar system as the old covenant. Many in that camp actually believe that He will reinstutute and oversee animal sacrifices at that time. 

Also, within the dispensational camp there are many who either minimize or fail entirely to teach the 10 commandments as the rule of life for the believer, since they supposedly belonged to a prior dispensation.

The dangers of these teachings should be obvious to any Spirit led Christian.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Taylor (Apr 4, 2022)

Brian T said:


> I am coming to see that the truth is probably somewhere in the middle of extreme discontinuity (classic dispensationalism) and extreme continuity (covenant theology) between the OT and the NT, For what it's worth.


This is an odd thing to say; covenant theology is opposed to “extreme continuity.” Have you read WCF 7?

(Also, keep in mind that a change in view as you describe would require you to inform the administrators.)


----------



## Brian T (Apr 4, 2022)

Taylor said:


> This is an odd thing to say; covenant theology is opposed to “extreme continuity.” Have you read WCF 7?
> 
> (Also, keep in mind that a change in view as you describe would require you to inform the administrators.)



I don't think I said that "covenant theology is opposed to 'extreme continuity.'"

And I have no idea what you mean by your statement in the parentheses. I simply think that pure covenant theology has its own problems, and that the truth probably lies _closer _to that vertical line below. Does that require notifying the admins?!?

The book I mentioned sets up a continuum of continuity-discontinuity between the OT and the NT, and places classic dispensationalism at the extreme end of "discontinuity" and covenant theology towards the other end (though not the extreme end) of the "_continuity_" spectrum:

DISCONTINUITY <------------------------------|----------------------------------------------> CONTINUITY

Classic Disp / Revised Disp / Progressive Disp | Progressive Cov / Cov Theology / Christian Reconstruction

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Taylor (Apr 4, 2022)

Brian T said:


> I don't think I said that "covenant theology is opposed to 'extreme continuity.'"
> 
> And I have no idea what you mean by your statement in the parentheses.
> 
> ...


You labeled covenant theology as “extreme continuity,” and then revealed that you are leaning yourself toward Progressive Dispensationalism. You said: “I am coming to see that the truth is probably somewhere in the middle of extreme discontinuity (classic dispensationalism) and extreme continuity (covenant theology) between the OT and the NT, For [sic] what it's worth. Probably a hybrid such as ‘Progressive dispensationalism’ or ‘Progressive covenantalism.’”

To the former, I would argue that you are wrong; to the latter, if you do change your position, you must inform the administrators of such, because it violates the terms of membership on Puritan Board, both being contra-confessional.


----------



## Brian T (Apr 4, 2022)

Taylor said:


> You labeled covenant theology as “extreme continuity,” and then revealed that you are leaning yourself toward Progressive Dispensationalism. You said: “I am coming to see that the truth is probably somewhere in the middle of extreme discontinuity (classic dispensationalism) and extreme continuity (covenant theology) between the OT and the NT, For [sic] what it's worth. Probably a hybrid such as ‘Progressive dispensationalism’ or ‘Progressive covenantalism.’”
> 
> To the former, I would argue that you are wrong; to the latter, if you do change your position, you must inform the administrators of such, because it violates the terms of membership on Puritan Board, both being contra-confessional.



Can you tell me the differences between progressive dispensationalism (as proposed by Saucy, Blaising, and Darrell Bock) and progressive covenantalism (as proposed by Peter Gentry and Stephen Wellum)?


----------



## Taylor (Apr 4, 2022)

Brian T said:


> Can you tell me the differences between progressive dispensationalism (as proposed by Saucy, Blaising, and Darrell Bock) and progressive covenantalism (as proposed by Peter Gentry and Stephen Wellum)?


Sure, I could. I studied biblical theology at the seminary level under both progressive dispensationalists and progressive covenantalists. I was required to read Darrell Bock on hermeneutics, for example, where he discusses this distinction. Moreover, it's not difficult to research or to understand. But that's not the topic of this thread. The point of my comment to you was to alert you of the implications of a shift in theology in this particular area.


----------



## Brian T (Apr 4, 2022)

Taylor said:


> Sure, I could. I studied biblical theology at the seminary level under both progressive dispensationalists and progressive covenantalists. I was required to read Darrell Bock on hermeneutics, for example, where he discusses this distinction. Moreover, it's not difficult to research or to understand. But that's not the topic of this thread. The point of my comment to you was to alert you of the implications of a shift in theology in this particular area.



So, if I wake up Wednesday and say, "I am a progressive dispensationalist!!" I'd better run and inform the admins because this is "contra-confessional" and constitutes some violation of the PB terms of membership??

Really??

I am just a layman, who never went to seminary and doesn't have a bunch of time to read a bunch of books by the likes of Vos, Gaffin, Tipton, Wellum, Gentry, Blaising, etc. so I doubt I will ever know EXACTLY with 100% PRECISION where I fall on that spectrum I outlined above. All I know is that I generally agree with the contours of covenant theology, but I can see and understand (based, again, on a limited acquaintance and being forced, due to time-constraints, to reading books like the Merkle book I mentioned above, which give you a 30,000 ft. overview of the six positions outlined above) how each of these all have their own strengths and weaknesses and that _*perhaps *_there are some elements of dispensationalism that cannot be ignored and need to be incorporated into covenant theology..._and vice-versa_, which is precisely why "progressive dispensationalism" and "progressive covenantalism" are a thing now. And this is generally the meaning of my statement that the truth is probably somewhere in the middle of the two positions.

And, as I said earlier, up until a few weeks ago, I thought dispensationalism really was off-the-wall bonkers and could not understand why anyone would uphold it. Having read the Merkle book (and a couple of others) to get an idea of where they are coming from, all I can say is that, even though I still disagree with classic and revised dispensationalism, I can now at least understand where they are coming from, why they think the way they do, and won't be casting aspersions on them or questioning their faith (as some, apparently, are wont to do).

BTW, in the reading I've done on all this in the past few weeks, I definitely find myself landing in the premillennial camp rather than the amillennial as I leaned toward previously. 

So, there's that....


----------



## Taylor (Apr 4, 2022)

Brian T said:


> So, if I wake up Wednesday and say, "I am a progressive dispensationalist!!" I'd better run and inform the admins because this is "contra-confessional" and constitutes some violation of the PB terms of membership??
> 
> Really??


Yes. From the Board Terms and Rules (Requirements for Membership, 3.b):

"The Puritan Board forbids the membership of proponents of New Covenant Theology (NCT) and unconfessional views of the Law of God. The Reformed Confessions governing the board affirm a functional distinction between moral, civil, and ceremonial aspects of the Mosaic Law and deny any view that would claim 'Christians are only under the law of Jesus Christ.' Those who are proponents of this doctrine should refrain from registering and *any members who embrace this doctrine should have the integrity to forfeit their membership privileges*. Members who violate this rule will be suspended or banned" (emphasis added).​
This would most certainly include Progressive Dispensationalism.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## reformed grit (Apr 4, 2022)

There may be a 12 steps to recovery program, however. Surely the admins would offer corrective guidance or even a preventive salve. I think there are still under 40 of them. I know MacArthur has a book.


----------



## lynnie (Apr 4, 2022)

Taylor said:


> Who here idolizes John MacArthur? That anyone “idolizes” MacArthur is hardly MacArthur’s fault. Blaming him for some whacko’s supposed self-destruction is, again, outrageously extreme. Literally everyone here recognizes his theological issues, but the things you are saying are astronomically out of proportion.


Just so you know, For what it's worth, maybe not here at PB......in Calvinist Baptist D.i.s,p.y circles I think it crosses into idolatry. I've seen it and it's creepy. I've seen it just the past year in several. And in a vague intuitive sort of way that's hard to explain, it tends to not be just the fault of lowly lay people when big name speakers or celebrities ( Christian or of the world) end up with devoted fans who idolize them and won't hear a word of their human failings but need to have somebody on a pedestal. Its not normal respect and discipleship and having mentors, it is "sick" for lack of a better word. There are things at work in the guys at the top, and they like the adoration. Green Baggins did a good piece a while back on avoiding the trap of narcissism as a pastor, I'll try to find it later.

Reactions: Love 1


----------



## Herald (Apr 4, 2022)

Rescued said:


> Please don't tell me the whole John MacArthur thing is not a problem for orthodox Christianity.


Jeremy, you are making a mountain out of a molehill. John MacArthur is no more a problem for orthodox Christianity than Charles Spurgeon was. I just do not see this insidious threat to our faith that you seem to notice. OK. So John MacArthur is a Dispensationalist. Most folks on this board already know that. You are not informing us of anything new. Many of us can discard MacArthur's eschatology without calling for him to be run out of the country on a rail. If some people turn MacArthur into a cult personality, that is on them.

Reactions: Like 4 | Amen 1


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Apr 4, 2022)

Dispensationalists have MacArthur, Presbyterians had, and have Sproul (he sure has not disappeared from my Facebook feed). Preachers becoming famous happens; some handle it, some not as well. Christ is preached out of envy by some says Paul yet he rejoices. Philippians 1:15-18. Neither was/is doing that so I think more the reason we follow Paul here. Let's move on. Thread closed.

Reactions: Like 4


----------

