John MacArthur on Beth Moore

Status
Not open for further replies.

Stephen L Smith

Moderator
Staff member
MacArthur's Study Bible is also now available in the deficient NIV2011 Translation (a translation so bad even the SBC condemned it). Was this an attempt to reach a greater audience...or a greater market?
No, MacArthur used to have a comment on this on a Youtube clip but it appears to have vanished. MaCarthur was not happy about the NIV. He does not like it. But he acknowledged that a significant Christian population use the NIV. He wanted to reach them with the truth. He said he would do a study Bible using the NIV2011 if the publishers agreed he could use his notes (which strongly disagree with the egalitarianism of the NIV2011). They agreed. I believe MacArthur was sincere here. He wanted to reach people with the truth, not increase his profits.
 

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
No, MacArthur used to have a comment on this on a Youtube clip but it appears to have vanished. MaCarthur was not happy about the NIV. He does not like it. But he acknowledged that a significant Christian population use the NIV. He wanted to reach them with the truth. He said he would do a study Bible using the NIV2011 if the publishers agreed he could use his notes (which strongly disagree with the egalitarianism of the NIV2011). They agreed. I believe MacArthur was sincere here. He wanted to reach people with the truth, not increase his profits.

That is good to know. I am sure he is still making a profit off these efforts, but this does sound like a proper motivation. Maybe the study notes can undo the misunderstandings from the mistranslated texts. It is always hard to know what is a compromise and what is a chance to reach a wider audience. This sounds like a wise move.
 
Last edited:

Dachaser

Puritan Board Doctor
Every Charismatic is not a heretic. Folks can differ on theology and still be Christian. It is ok to be harsh with false teachers (aka heretics). But we go straight to the heretic label too many times.
I was once an AOG Elder, do agree not all chsrasmatics list or in heresy, but many are into bad theology, such as God speaking directly to them in say journaling for example.
 

Dachaser

Puritan Board Doctor
No, MacArthur used to have a comment on this on a Youtube clip but it appears to have vanished. MaCarthur was not happy about the NIV. He does not like it. But he acknowledged that a significant Christian population use the NIV. He wanted to reach them with the truth. He said he would do a study Bible using the NIV2011 if the publishers agreed he could use his notes (which strongly disagree with the egalitarianism of the NIV2011). They agreed. I believe MacArthur was sincere here. He wanted to reach people with the truth, not increase his profits.
Yes, as he caught much grief on this, but did want to provide study notes to offset bad translation widely bring used.
 

Taylor

Puritan Board Senior
Of course, I also suppose it needs to be asked, what sort of strange conference has their pastors "free associate" with words? The whole thing seemed to be a weird setting.

That’s the main thing I’m asking, too. This seemed kinda weird.
 

Pilgrim

Puritanboard Commissioner
So, in my estimation, Founders Ministries came too late. The backwardness was already set in.

Founders predated the YRR movement by at least two decades depending on where you say that the YRR started. In terms of something identifiable, I'd put it between 2000 and 2005 or so. I think Founders started in 1982. The YRR was an attempted marriage of Calvinistic soteriology and seeker sensitive church growth methodology.

There is at least one minister in the OPC who is very visibly "woke." Is he the only one? What is being done about it?
 

Pilgrim

Puritanboard Commissioner
I think he is a SJW but I don't think he is a charismatic.

Most of the younger guys (below 40 or even below 50 or so) I'm familiar with are continuationist if not charismatic. There was a big uproar when the IMB prohibited "private prayer language" on the part of missionaries 15 years ago. That prohibition was rescinded a few years ago.
 

Pilgrim

Puritanboard Commissioner
The problem is that even a loose affiliation brings baggage, and the sin of one becomes the sin of all--at least in the eyes of those looking in from outside. Our church is unaffiliated, but our pastors have much fellowship across the RB world. Sure, I get that an informal group with a directory might be nice, but even that would require standards to join, and reasons to eject.
Surely the other RB pastors here would be glad to speak with you on the phone from time to time, and eventually you could have your own personal network of fellow laborers to turn to without being in something with an acronym and a baggage train.

Many would say that 26.14 and 26.15 are essentially describing an association. I'm not going to argue the point, but many RBs disagree with you, as you are no doubt aware.
 

Pilgrim

Puritanboard Commissioner
Another thought is that Phil Johnson is like MacArthur's attack dog and he called Beth Moore a Narcissist in the same session. But let me ask - who has a Bible named after him?

Of course, I also suppose it needs to be asked, what sort of strange conference has their pastors "free associate" with words? The whole thing seemed to be a weird setting.

I am not siding with Moore here, but I also do not trust any millionaire pastor, even Calvinistic ones. I believe part of our calling - while not to be poor - does necessitate us from not accumulating extreme wealth. MacArthur's Study Bible is also now available in the deficient NIV2011 Translation (a translation so bad even the SBC condemned it). Was this an attempt to reach a greater audience...or a greater market?

Considering the extremely negative comments MacArthur made about the NIV previously, I've wondered if it was forced on him by the publisher after HarperCollins took over Thomas Nelson. Regardless, I didn't buy their explanation of the NIV being super popular and wanting to get it in as many hands as possible. If that were the case, they would also issue it in the KJV, which still outsells the ESV, NKJV, and NASB.
 
Last edited:

Pilgrim

Puritanboard Commissioner
He seemed to make short work of woman not permitted to teach in same way that she is, and did not mention her views on receiving the words from Jesus personally.

That's probably because Storms agrees with such "words" having been an associate of some of the worst in charismania for decades. He's not into the prosperity gospel, but he was associated with the Vineyard as well as IHOP in KC.
 
Last edited:

Pilgrim

Puritanboard Commissioner
Is she not heavy into Charasmatic theology?

Yes: https://www.charismamag.com/blogs/f...w-beth-moore-is-calling-down-pentecostal-fire

And that's not as uncommon in the SBC as some may imagine. Until recently I've consistently underestimated the influence of charismaticism in the SBC. She's by no means the only one who says "God told me." The Blackabys have been a significant negative influence here as well. By "charismaticism" I don't mean tongues so much as I mean charismatic spirituality broadly speaking with regard to worship "style," "God told me" and so on. But there are full blown charismatic churches too.
 
Last edited:

Ben Zartman

Puritan Board Sophomore
Many would say that 26.14 and 26.15 are essentially describing an association. I'm not going to argue the point, but many RBs disagree with you, as you are no doubt aware.
That means they can know of and pray for each other-- we pray for other churches every week, and our members visit other like-minded churches when travelling, if they can: but any sort of organized group is unconfessional. I realize that there are RBs who disagree with this: it is because they are coming adrift from their confessional roots, if they ever understood them to begin with.
 

Broadus

Puritan Board Freshman
I learned about the MacArthur/Beth Moore kerfuffle yesterday. What MacArthur said needed to be said. What saddens me is that, to my knowledge, no notable SBC voice has ever criticized Moore’s teaching. She is an income producer for SBC’s LifeWay and is untouchable. Sure, it would have been better had the tone been better, but that’s the way these Q&A’s tend to be at such a conference. There is some levity and good-natured banter, but I thought MacArthur himself was pretty sincere and not flippant. His “go home” comment was indicating, in my opinion, for Beth Moore to stand down from the celebrity speaking circuit, that she does the church no benefit with her teaching.

Our church is still tangentially associated with the SBC, though two of our three elders want us to take a serious look at that continued relationship. The problem with the SBC, in my opinion, is that, as a denomination, it is basically a-theological. We won the “battle for the Bible” with the moderates and liberals, but theologically remain loosely evangelical. It’s a really big tent. The bottom line for the convention is producing more salvation decisions (as opposed to biblical conversion) and subsequent baptisms by whatever pragmatic method possible.

As to the Founders Ministries, that is the bright point in the convention and has been for, what, thirty years plus. They’ve taken a lot of heat concerning their forthcoming “By What Standard?” documentary (to be released in December, if I recall correctly).
 
Last edited:

Dachaser

Puritan Board Doctor
I learned about the MacArthur/Beth Moore kerfuffle yesterday. What MacArthur said needed to be said. What saddens me is that, to my knowledge, no notable SBC voice has ever criticized Moore’s teaching. She is an income producer for SBC’s LifeWay and is untouchable. Sure, it would have been better had the tone been better, but that’s the way these Q&A’s tend to be at such a conference. There is some levity and good-natured banter, but I thought MacArthur himself was pretty sincere and not flippant. His “go home” comment was indicating, in my opinion, for Beth Moore to stand down from the celebrity speaking circuit, that she does the church no benefit with her teaching.

Our church is still tangentially associated with the SBC, though two of our three elders want us to take a serious look at that continued relationship. The problem with the SBC, in my opinion, is that, as a denomination, it is basically a-theological. We won the “battle for the Bible” with the moderates and liberals, but theologically remain loosely evangelical. It’s a really big tent. The bottom line for the convention is producing more salvation decisions (as opposed to biblical conversion) and subsequent baptisms by whatever pragmatic method possible.

As to the Founders Ministries, that is the bright point in the convention and has been for, what, thirty years plus. They’ve taken a lot of heat concerning their forthcoming “By What Standard?” documentary (to be released in December, if I recall correctly).
SBC really had big tent, Calvinists, Arminians, chatismatics and none, creationist, and theistic evolutionists.
 

psycheives

Puritan Board Freshman
I think a lot of that was caused by how Todd Friel was conducting the discussion. .... The audience was also to blame. I thought MacCarthur's "go home" comment was excellent and appropriate in a number of ways, but the reaction of the audience was totally over the top.

While we are glad someone spoke against Beth Moore preaching, I think many are rightly critical of how it was done with laughing etc. The men led the audience and the audience was supposed to laugh.

Considering Friel was chosen to run the segment n this happened last year, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the whole thing was planned. This is typical MacArthur. He does this sort of thing. He did it last year, so it was obvious he and Friel organized to do it again.

I do think MacArthur is primarily to blame for the words “Go home” (which implies get back in the kitchen or ALL women should be at home) rather than something speaking directly to the sin of women preaching, like “Sit down” or “Be quiet” given the context. I think MacArthur ended up actually aiming at all women with “Go home” rather than at Beth Moore “Sit Down” or “Be quiet.” This was the one time saying “Be quiet,” was actually very appropriate.
 

Elizabeth

Puritan Board Sophomore
Hmmm. Women today sure are a tender lot.

That pesky MacArthur, always sticking his foot in his mouth. And men...those men, LAUGHING (more'n likely nervously) at us.

"Go home" places a woman in her God-given context. There is nothing wrong with home. God made it terribly important. She who works (in the sense of true work: praising God, studying, sharing, praying, helping and encouraging, etc., as well as the prosaic stuff) from home, works from a place of strength and honor. Whether married, single, with children or without, earning her keep outside of home, whatever: HOME is where she is to minister. That base where God would have her. That huge place which we have diminished in our own folly and pride.

The trouble isn't what MacArthur said. The trouble is we (as a society, and as women) fail to see the power in the position. We only see a place of sexism, narrow confines and floor-scrubbing, when we think of home. What home really is (or can be) is the most razor-sharp place of ministry anyone can possibly have.

But we've thrown away our birth-right for a mess of modern pottage, a la: "I am woman, hear me roar".
 

B.L.

Puritan Board Sophomore
"Ask Ligonier" is hosting John MacArthur tonight at 7:30 p.m. EST. While I doubt this was arranged for MacArthur to address the topic of women preachers and the "go home" incident, I'd be quite surprised if someone didn't pose follow-up questions to him on the issue. Sending to those who might be interested in tuning in.

Dr. John MacArthur will join us as a special guest on our Ask Ligonier team to answer your biblical and theological questions live online.

Dr. MacArthur has been pastor-teacher of Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, Calif., for the past fifty years. He is the featured teacher on Grace to You, and he has written numerous books, including None Other, Good News, and Final Word.

Simply tweet us your questions by using the hashtag #AskLigonier or leave them as comments or messages on our Facebook page. This special online event will be streamed live on Ligonier’s blog, YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter. We hope you’ll join us tomorrow.
 

TheInquirer

Puritan Board Freshman
I don't know the first thing about Beth Moore other than my wife thinks she is garbage but on MacArthur's spiel - it's all fun and games when you agree with his mocking and the laughter from his devotees but I recommend either reading or listening to his spiel tearing up Amillenialism. Check out Sam Waldron's "MacArthur's Millenial Manifesto" for a transcription of the speech and a rebuttal by Waldron.

MacArthur strikes me as a guy who really doesn't do his homework real well on the people he attacks and I've come not to trust the accuracy of his critiques. It's too bad because there are a lot of his fans who treat him like a Protestant pope.
 

Dachaser

Puritan Board Doctor
I don't know the first thing about Beth Moore other than my wife thinks she is garbage but on MacArthur's spiel - it's all fun and games when you agree with his mocking and the laughter from his devotees but I recommend either reading or listening to his spiel tearing up Amillenialism. Check out Sam Waldron's "MacArthur's Millenial Manifesto" for a transcription of the speech and a rebuttal by Waldron.

MacArthur strikes me as a guy who really doesn't do his homework real well on the people he attacks and I've come not to trust the accuracy of his critiques. It's too bad because there are a lot of his fans who treat him like a Protestant pope.
Many respect him for sticking up for primary Bible theology and doctrines.
 

Susan777

Puritan Board Sophomore
MacArthur strikes me as a guy who really doesn't do his homework real well on the people he attacks and I've come not to trust the accuracy of his critiques.

I think MacArthur has done his homework on Beth Moore, who, by the way is not “garbage”. He has evaluated her claims against Scripture and found them invalid.
 

JTB.SDG

Puritan Board Junior
Not a fan. Sorry. Just listened to the first minute. Sounded to me like a joke. The interviewer asked in a flippant way and the answer was given in a flippant way. Maybe I needed to listen to the rest but had no desire. I don't see any place for addressing serious matters in a flippant and joking fashion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top