About Attacks on Rick Warren

gb

Good post - Lee is usually vey good, and he comes through again.

I just cannot get over how many people follow leaders of the faith that they do not know. They will fault Rick because they read some journalistic trash that someone is getting rich off of. But, they won't spend time getting to know the person that they consider one of their spiritual leaders.

Could this new method of discipleship be one of the reasons that we have so many men failing in the ministry?

 

Joseph

I think - if you read my posts, I have never questioned his salvation. And I won't question his salvation - that would be on the same level as anyone questioning Rick's salvation.

I did refer to the obvious - he does not have what most of us would call a salvation experience*. Since, I know where he has talked about not having a traditional salvation experience - I would like someone to show me where he has said that he did have a salvation experience that we could all relate to.

My posts were to point out the other obvious oddity - Rick is attacked for his theology, and he is fairly public about his salvation. But, some of our favored theologians do not have salvation experiences, and ironically, I was questioned for noticing an obvious example of this dichotomy.

* At least IMHO, he does not have what I would call a salvation experience. I too have let my earthly father, mother, grandfather, etc down - that is not what I would call an experience with God, but with remorse. IMHO

 

gb

Are you talking about Rick?

 

This is the first that I have ever heard this about Macarthur, so I am gonna ask, "Which books has he written on a market driven church business?" Do these books work?

 

Has anyone found John MacArthur's admission to a salvation experience?

That might actually be a good thing - cause you can only have a salvation experience if you have one.

From John:

I have met one or two othes like this over the years.

 

That quotes sounded almost like Joel Osteen's testimony.

 

Well, as I said before (at least something like this) there are a bunch of Christians that follow men that they do not know much about. They and their theologies sound good. But, I like to know a little more about the individual . . .

 

It almost sounds like Macarthur believes he was "born saved". I am really struggling with how one can think they "always believed". I tend to think that someone who believes this may never have really believed in the first place. He's full of biblical knowledge, but is it only head knowledge?

It would be a sad day if God says to Macarthur "depart from me, I never knew you".

 

That would be sad.

I think, the rest of his story is more painful. He seemed to be more grieved over letting his earthly father down (he had vandalized a school) than he seemed to be over letting God down.

 

If someone can articulate that they trust in Christ's sacrifice alone for their salvation, then we have no reason to doubt their salvation. Who's to say he wasn't saved as a baby or toddler before he can articulate it and before he could remember it? Modern evangelicals are obsessed with "a time and a place". The only thing I care about is do you believe now?

 

Faith comes by hearing (understanding). Babies and toddler's cannot "understand". This issues is not whether he believes now or not, but his statement that he "always" believed. This insinuates salvation upon birth, and as the RW bashers like to say...a different Gospel.

 

How do you know a baby or toddler cannot understand?

I do hope that MacArthur is consistent with his own evangelical theology and believes that there was a time where he was unregenerate and God regenerated him to new life. But without Mac here to clarify that point, we should accept his profession on good faith without playing guessing games or "insinuating".

 

Andy

I apologize, had I worded my questions and responses better, I think that webdog's response(s) would have been more tolerable.

I believe as well as do you, that should God say "I never knew you." to anyone that felt that they were a believer - that will be a sad day.

Now I won't try to write for webdog, but if you, or Macarthur, or I are one of those told to leave - it would be a sad day. Just as I do not know the heart and mind of our brother John, I do not know whom the people are that God's will say that to.

Humbly

Wayne

 

Why can't babies and toddlers talk? Surely if they can understand...they can respond. I'll be sure to ask my 10 month old son what he wants for breakfast...I'm sure he'll understand. If he tells me "cereal", I'll share the Gospel with him.

 

Not to deviate too much from the topic but....
Webdog I noticed your bible quote in your signature so you can probably hold your own on this. Before I forfit, and I do forfit, here's a tidbit for thought:

2 Samuel 12:23 "But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me"

I understand this to mean David believes his baby whom has died will be in heaven.
With David's assumption, it would appear (to me) that babies are not able to accept Christ as Lord though they may understand the simple concept of cereal. I think we are to assume David's thoughts are truth? Of course, all children/babies/toddlers are different, different levels, so who knows specifically if there is a simple right or wrong here.

 

There is a difference between understanding and articulating. I gather that you are a young father. I have 3 that are older now (tween age). As we watched them grow, we were amazed at how much they understood, even though they could not articulate it. This is true especially from the ages around 9 mos. to 2 or 3 years old. I've heard that testimony from many other parents as well.

I hate to say this, but your reasoning sounds awfully modern and scientific - you know, the ones who say babies aren't real humans, because they aren't as developed as us. Why do you limit the power of God?

Another thing, some people develop faster than others. I've read about gifted children who were talking in conversations by age 1. Some were doing algebra by age 4. So it probably varies widely on who can understand certain things at certain ages.

Do not limit the power of God.

 

I agree. Babies are saved by God's grace. Sin is breaking of the Law. In order to know that you are breaking the Law...and to be held accountable...you have to understand what the Law is, and how breaking it affects us. Regardless what Andy says, babies do not know this. My son spits his food all over the place. I tell him "no", and he spits anyway. He does not understand yet what no means, or that by continuing to spit he is being disobedient to me. God does not hold him accountable because he does not understand.