What does MacArthur think of non Reformed?

[evangelist6589]

Mac does a great job at exposing the false teachers, exposing the charismatic and such. His books The Truth War, Charismatic Chaos STRANGE FIRE, the Jesus You Cant Ignore, and others do just this. But I have to wonder what MacArthur thinks of non Reformed? At the Strange Fire conference Mac said some things to indicate that only Reformed are the guardians of the truth, and some comments against non Reformed were made in a derogatory fashion. But I just have to wonder what does Mac think about the non Reformed that are Biblical and true to the gospel? Some of these are:

David Jeremiah
David Hawkings
Charles Stanley
Erwin Lutzer
Woodrow Crow
Randy Alcorn

Are these men not the Guardians of the truth? Why is it that only Reformed can be the guardians of the truth?

 

[Grasshopper]

Mac does a great job at exposing the false teachers, exposing the charismatic and such. His books The Truth War, Charismatic Chaos STRANGE FIRE, the Jesus You Cant Ignore, and others do just this. But I have to wonder what MacArthur thinks of non Reformed? At the Strange Fire conference Mac said some things to indicate that only Reformed are the guardians of the truth, and some comments against non Reformed were made in a derogatory fashion. But I just have to wonder what does Mac think about the non Reformed that are Biblical and true to the gospel? Some of these are:

David Jeremiah
David Hawkings
Charles Stanley
Erwin Lutzer
Woodrow Crow
Randy Alcorn

Are these men not the Guardians of the truth? Why is it that only Reformed can be the guardians of the truth?

Probably thinks the same about them as he does those who disagree with his eschatology, or any other doctrine.

 

[go2church]

One thing to appreciate about MacArthur, if got a question, he'll give you an answer. You may not like the answer, but you'll get an answer. Shoot him an email.

 

[Dr. Bob]

He probably feels sorrow for any truly regenerate person who ISN'T reformed in soteriology.

I know I do.
:saint:

 

[OldRegular]

If only his eschatology was as Biblical as his soteriology!

 

[evangelist6589]

He probably feels sorrow for any truly regenerate person who ISN'T reformed in soteriology.

I know I do.
:saint:

But they are not the enemy and he does not talk about them in his books.

 

[Dr. Bob]

I am probably closer to John's theological position than any other famous writer. And while he pulls no punches with the reformed brethren who hold various dispensational or covenant positions, he is outspoken against the neo-Calvinists who are continuationists and of charismatic ilk.

 

[OldRegular]

I am a political conservative and have read a lot about neo-conservatives [Still don't know what one is!] but neo-Calvinists is a new one on me! Of course I am a Doctrine of Grace person myself having never read anything by Calvin!

 

[Rippon]

Of course I am a Doctrine of Grace person myself having never read anything by Calvin!

And of couse you think because you believe in the Doctrine of Grace you cannot properly be called a Calvinst --huh?

You are boasting that you have never read any of the biblical commentaries and sermons of one of,if not the, most influential biblical expositors in Church History. You're very proud of being uninformed in that regard. "Hey,look at my library. I don't own a single book by John Calvin! Pat me on the back."

Hey,I'm having fun with you OR. If you have anything by Owen,Turretin or T.Goodwin (or their equivalents)I'll let you pass.

 

[OldRegular]

And of couse you think because you believe in the Doctrine of Grace you cannot properly be called a Calvinst --huh?

You are boasting that you have never read any of the biblical commentaries and sermons of one of,if not the, most influential biblical expositors in Church History. You're very proud of being uninformed in that regard. "Hey,look at my library. I don't own a single book by John Calvin! Pat me on the back."

Hey,I'm having fun with you OR. If you have anything by Owen,Turretin or T.Goodwin (or their equivalents)I'll let you pass.

No problem. I have nothing in particular against Calvinism. I have thought several times in recent years I would get his Institutes but as I note below I find reading some stuff difficult these days!

That OldRegular Baptist, Charles Spurgeon, said of Calvinism:

"The old truth that Calvin preached, that Augustine preached, that Paul preached, is the truth that I must preach to-day, or else be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape the truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine. John Knox's gospel is my gospel. That which thundered through Scotland must thunder through England again."

Would that it would thunder through America again!

Sadly Calvinism is used as a pejorative today and of course he believed some stuff I don't. That is why I use Doctrines of Grace; bothers the "freewill" brethren a little also!

I have John Owen's 7 volume set on Hebrews. Thought I would study them in my retirement but in honesty they are too much for me, lots of semicolons but few periods. Someone has condensed the seven volumes into one. Whether it is legitimate or not I can't say.

I have a number of commentaries and doctrinal books, many by old writers and some by relatively current writers. Sadly, I have found in my old age that commentaries and such are difficult to read unless I am trying to write something.

 

[evangelist6589]

I am probably closer to John's theological position than any other famous writer. And while he pulls no punches with the reformed brethren who hold various dispensational or covenant positions, he is outspoken against the neo-Calvinists who are continuationists and of charismatic ilk.

I am confused. Neo-Calvinists? Describe what position that David Jeremiah, Charles Stanley, Erwin Lutzer, and Randy Alcorn are? What does John think of them?

 

[preacher4truth]

I am confused. Neo-Calvinists? Describe what position that David Jeremiah, Charles Stanley, Erwin Lutzer, and Randy Alcorn are? What does John think of them?

If you watched the Strange Fire conference, they alluded to neo-calvinists (calvinist continuists) and marked them as being an oxymoron, and they're correct.

I've always felt something was wrong or just not right about John Piper's teachings. When he talked about wanting the gift of tongues, faking the gift of tongues, and of being envious of others who do, he said 'he wants that toy from God' (he called it a toy, not certain that is the EXACT quote). Anyhow, that right there doesn't exactly sit right with me.

I don't know what John MacArthur think of any of those above that you list. DJ lost more credibility with me when he rubbed elbows with Paul Crouch and justified their prosperity gospel some (no, I cannot remember his exact words) it was something about giving to get back in the Scriptures he used.

 

[evangelist6589]

If you watched the Strange Fire conference, they alluded to neo-calvinists (calvinist continuists) and marked them as being an oxymoron, and they're correct.

I've always felt something was wrong or just not right about John Piper's teachings. When he talked about wanting the gift of tongues, faking the gift of tongues, and of being envious of others who do, he said 'he wants that toy from God' (he called it a toy, not certain that is the EXACT quote). Anyhow, that right there doesn't exactly sit right with me.

I don't know what John MacArthur think of any of those above that you list. DJ lost more credibility with me when he rubbed elbows with Paul Crouch and justified their prosperity gospel some (no, I cannot remember his exact words) it was something about giving to get back in the Scriptures he used.

And if you also noticed he only did that once and probably regretted it.

 

[preacher4truth]

And if you also noticed he only did that once and probably regretted it.

I don't know how many times he's been on there. I do know there is a danger in continuing to endorse a person or merely overlook things because we've grown fond of them. I believe he should recant his support of TBN, and he does support what they are doing. Here is some more information.

 

[OldRegular]

The Word of Faith movement is the worst heresy to trouble the Church in the last century at least. Any person who is called to preach the Gospel has the duty of denouncing this heresy, not embracing it.

And I still don't know what constitutes neo-Calvinism or new-Calvinism!

 

[preacher4truth]

The Word of Faith movement is the worst heresy to trouble the Church in the last century at least. Any person who is called to preach the Gospel has the duty of denouncing this heresy, not embracing it.

And I still don't know what constitutes neo-Calvinism or new-Calvinism!

I'd rank it right up there with easy-believism. There are countless souls deceived by this heresy. Say a prayer, followed up with the popish declaration of the preacher; 'I declare you on your way to heaven'.

 

[Luke2427]

I'd rank it right up there with easy-believism. There are countless souls deceived by this heresy. Say a prayer, followed up with the popish declaration of the preacher; 'I declare you on your way to heaven'.

I agree with both of you.

I think the bigger problem of the two in this age, though, is the charismatic movement. And I include in that heading all Pentecostals, Baptiscostals, Church of God, Assemblies of God, etc... not just those who are health, wealth, TBN types.

It encourages men to be guided by the worst, most fickle, most easily deceived part of us and attributes it to the Holy Spirit.

 

[JonC]

I agree with both of you.

I think the bigger problem of the two in this age, though, is the charismatic movement. And I include in that heading all Pentecostals, Baptiscostals, Church of God, Assemblies of God, etc... not just those who are health, wealth, TBN types.

It encourages men to be guided by the worst, most fickle, most easily deceived part of us and attributes it to the Holy Spirit.

Would you say that they are a bigger problem because they believe in the continuation of sign gifts or because of their emphasis and misapplication of these “gifts”?

 

[Luke2427]

Would you say that they are a bigger problem because they believe in the continuation of sign gifts or because of their emphasis and misapplication of these “gifts”?

I don't think you can have one without the other.

They cannot misapply them if they don't believe they are for today and they cannot BUT misapply them if they use them and they are NOT for today.

But I think one of the biggest problems is that it discourages people from the employment of wisdom in decision making which is vitally important and it encourages people to be led by the most fickle, most easily deceived part of us- our feelings.

 

[quantumfaith]

I don't think you can have one without the other.

They cannot misapply them if they don't believe they are for today and they cannot BUT misapply them if they use them and they are NOT for today.

But I think one of the biggest problems is that it discourages people from the employment of wisdom in decision making which is vitally important and it encourages people to be led by the most fickle, most easily deceived part of us- our feelings.

Now I am in no way a "charismatic", but there certainly is nothing wrong with "feelings" if they are accompanied by intellect and wisdom. God did in fact create us with "feelings" and one can only assume that they serve some purpose.