MacArthur again…
The context of MacArthur’s interview is his ripping of Doug Pagitt. (BTW MacArthur ridicules the concept of “context” in the interview also.) He calls Doug Pagitt, “not a pastor and not a Christian.” Do you think MacArthur has a right to call into question anyone’s salvation? I think that right is reserved for God alone. I don’t agree with everything Pagitt says, but MacArthur has no right to rip him.
I think calling MacArthur a loser pales into comparison of what MacArthur did to Pagitt… What’s worse… calling someone a loser? Or calling someone “not a Christian?”
Its one thing if he does it based on solid biblical truths… but in this case, he’s just wrong about the bible also. In otherwords, he strips Pagitt of his salvation based on incorrect interpretation of the bible. So he’s wrong about Pagitt, AND he’s wrong about the bible.
If you don’t agree, then tell me where in the bible it says that the church’s ONE function is the truth? The emphasis of MacArthur’s ministry is the truth. While you may say that the truth encompasses love, I think its clear by MacArthur’s ripping of Pagitt, that MacArthur will sacrifice love whenever he gets the chance. Christ emphasized LOVE in his ministry. MacArthur emphasizes truth… and sidesteps the love issue by claiming “love is included in truth.”
Its great that MacArthur has a big church and has been preaching for many years. That doesn’t make any of his teachings correct. Just because someone has a big church and a good ministry means that you listen to anything he says? You need to judge his teachings based on the bible. Judge the merits of his teachings based on the teaching themselves. Don’t say, oh he’s been preaching for such a long time, he must be correct. That’s just lazy. There are so many people with big churches that are teaching lies. Are you going to believe them too?
Yes I want the Ephesians unity of the church. That’s the entire point of this post. MacArthur’s teachings are ripping apart the church. He called Doug Pagitt’s church “not a church.” He called Doug Pagitt, “not a pastor.” He called Doug Pagitt, “not a Christian.” MacArthur needs to be held accountable for those claims. Wake up people. Stop drinking the MacArthur kool aid. Think, actually think about what he’s saying rather than swallowing it whole. I’ve seen MacArthur’s teachings directly destroy the fellowship of so many brother’s and sisters. His teachings are divisive, myopic, and the worst part, they’re just plain unbiblical. Again, tell me where in the bible it says that the church’s ONE function is the truth?
Anyone who rips apart the church based on untruths IS a loser.
Powered by FireStats
9 Comments, Comment or Ping
kanfood
even though calling JM as a loser is not as bad as JM calling Doug Pagitt “not a christian”, “not a pastor”, and that his church is “not a church”, you’re still guilty of calling JM a “loser”.
Dec 30th, 2007
bon_choi
have to agree with you wifey on that one. i do have to say though i personally don’t like JM myself based on using the Twelve Ordinary Men as small group material this year. although he would back up some of the things he said with scripture, the guy would write stuff in the book with really no basis at all in my opinion. i don’t like how he would expound on some things about one of the lesser known disciples but he basically made it up.
Dec 30th, 2007
KingdomSheepDog
I don’t know everything that JM is teaching, but I read enough of this guy to know that he misses the spirit of the Gospel, and misses it badly. He can quote a lot of scripture, but careful students know that he just USES scripture for his purpose. I agree with you that, in my humble opinion, his teachings do more harm to the church than good. Because of people like him, I come to the conviction it is better for a Christian to err in the liberal side than in the fundamentalist side. The reason why he is so upset with the emergent church movement, because the movement is mostly about avoiding mistakes that people like JM make.
Dec 30th, 2007
KingdomSheepDog
If we can take out the demeaning part from the the term “loser,” I think your calling JM that is not a technically inaccurate assessment. I think his frantic negative reaction to the emergent church movement signals a losing mentality. He is afraid of and frustrated by the movement.
Although I don’t agree everything with the emergent church movement, I still feel comical to watch the frantic reaction of the fundamentalists who sensed the end of their day is near.
Dec 30th, 2007
kanfood
As I read and re-read your post, I believe you hit it right on. We need to expose the falsehoods of many of these self-proclaimed spokesmen of God, but, be careful, don’t use the same methods of theirs. We need to do it lovingly.
It is so unfortunate that people can tolerate and even accept JM’s unloving, judgmental comments about another brother. I preached about false graciousness at the expense of justice last week. This is one clear example.
Jan 1st, 2008
KingdomSheepDog
Oops, sorry, the above comment is mine, not Cindy’s.
Jan 1st, 2008
im4GMG
I really have to agree with the comments of KingdomSheepDog here, having read these last two posts and the many accompany comments to the previous one. (Curious, recently I’ve found myself agree with KingdomSheepDog often…
)
Jan 7th, 2008
im4GMG
Oh… I did notice one thing that I haven’t quite been able to agree with yet in KSD’s comments above: Because of people like him, I come to the conviction it is better for a Christian to err in the liberal side than in the fundamentalist side. Fundamentalists who sometimes (or often) neglect some of the fundamentals—like love—in their comments and actions are indeed painfully unfortunate. But I find liberals who often (or always) neglect most of the fundamentals to be frighteningly more painful. I like what Dr. Scorgie said in a sermon many years ago: “I like to think of myself as a conservationist .”
Jan 7th, 2008
searchingfortreasures
I wrote this on Kanfood’s xanga but wanted to comment here also — The fact that MacArthur has a Bible named after himself “the John MacArthur Bible” makes you wonder if perhaps someone thinks too highly of himself. Any good student of the Bible should NEVER trust the interpretations of only ONE PERSON. You need to make sure that you are reading the scholarly work of many scholars. One person telling you what everything means in the Bible could very easily lead to heretical teaching — and you wouldn’t even know it.
It reminds me of why I love and prefer my seminary vs. some other more fundamental (reformed) ones. At Bethel, we are given many of the sides of theological views and given the opportunity to search God’s heart and decide what we believe. At certain more reformed ones, you are TOLD what to believe and are told why the other sides are WRONG and why following them will lead you down to hell. I don’t know that much about MacArthur, but from what I know, it seems that he fits into the latter group. Sadly.
Jan 8th, 2008
Reply to “MacArthur again…”