« Free Church Press Resources-- still no online store... | Main | John MacArthur offers more skepticism on the YRR and "Flat-screen" Preachers »

2013.03.18

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Stephen

FYI, the video is 2 years old and the second part was posted here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6wWedCqfcM

I don't claim (or want) to speak for MacArthur, but it seems his point is that Calvinism = God is sovereign and able and doesn't need our help, just our obedience in preaching. Arminianism = Syncretism and Pragmatism, where the preacher has responsibility to persuade the mind and heart of the sinner. I think that's a little simplistic, but there's a helpful reminder in there. The trouble with the critique is that anyone can define a Pragmatist by someone who is one step more hip than he is.

Max

Wow! Dr. MacArthur must have visited the SBC-YRR church plants in my area! He described their pastors, methods, and message exactly! While he uses his platform to put a dig in for Arminianism (?), he has expressed what many SBC non-Calvinists are concerned about regarding "New" Calvinism.

The 21st century Calvinism resurgence has indeed been commandeered by an aggressive, militant, and macho cast of YRR characters with a distorted view of sanctification which tries to drag as much world into the church as possible and still appear Christian. The New Calvinists are in the process of shooting "Old" Calvinism in the foot. When the new wave crashes on the shore, a generation of 20s-30s will lie disillusioned in its wake.

peter lumpkins

Hi Stephen,

Yes, the video is about two years old. But that has nothing to do with it being new to me and perhaps many readers here. When I posted Al Mohler's infamous indication about New Calvinism being the only option for thinking evangelicals, the video was close to a year old if I recall correctly.

As for your statement that "Arminianism = Syncretism and Pragmatism, where the preacher has responsibility to persuade the mind and heart of the sinner" that is not what MacArthur indicated. He appeared to imply dress and behavior, for example, were "Arminian". He also spoke of an "Arminian ecclesiology", whatever the Sam Hill that is.

Furthermore, I'm not getting your statement--"the preacher has responsibility to persuade the mind and heart of the sinner"--in light of the Apostle Paul's passionate confession, "Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men..." (2 Co 5:11). Are you suggesting Paul was an Arminian Pragmatist since he obviously embraced persuading people of the truth?

Lydia

What a strange video. It seems the situation does not bother him too much because he invites leaders of this movement to speak at his conferences. Is he not connecting dots?

I suppose he suffers from the same delusions many from the Reformed community suffer as they label all non Cals as Arminians. But in this case it is Arminian "behavior". Hmm.

He has a problem with the new resurgence of Calvinism because they are acting like beer swiling, trash talking, dressing badly "Arminians"?

Seriously?

I do agree with him that his resurgence of Calvinism does not acknowledge sanctification at all. But I cannot figure why that surprises him. Has he not read up on his hero, Calvin and his Geneva?

I suspect our YRR friends will point out that McArthur is a dipsy and that explains everything. :o)

the Old Adam

I listen to MacArthur's "sermons" once in a while on my way to work.

I would say that he is a 'dipstick Christian'.

But mostly interested in checking yours.

__

There's not a drop of assurance that comes out of that guys mouth. Nothing but law. Sure, he knows what the gospel is. And he even hands it over once in a while. But in the next breath he rips it right back out of your hands.

Stephen

Peter, I wasn't trying to insinuate anything, just making an attempt of interpreting MacArthur. You asked a (somewhat rhetorical) question about Part 2 of the interview, so I directed readers to that if they wanted to see it. As I said, I don't particularly buy the theological version of MacArthur's critique, but I think he comes close to pointing out a couple deficiencies - I personally think his critique is more aimed at the young, seeker-driven types like Ed Young Jr, Andy Stanley, Steven Furtick, and Perry Noble, who sometimes claim 'reformed' beliefs than on the YRR crowd that is more likely seen reading The Gospel Coalition. But again, a "pragmatist" is simply someone a couple ounces of hair gel hipper than you.

peter lumpkins

Stephen,

My apologies, brother. I guess my response does seem reactionary. I have heard too many times now, the claim from many YRR that persuading people of the gospel message reduces to "pragmatism" since it's the Holy Spirit's role to do so...

Peace, brother. And have a great Tuesday in the Lord...

Peter

Job

@Lydia:

"Has he not read up on his hero, Calvin and his Geneva?"

Or maybe he knows that there are more Calvinists than Calvin (who by the way was only a 4 pointer and MacArthur is a 5 pointer) to draw from, plus MacArthur disagrees heavily with Calvin and the original magisterial Reformers on many other areas (i.e. the relationship between the church and state, infant baptism, ecclesiology and eschatology to name a few). MacArthur draws more from the Puritans - who if anything took sanctification too far - than the magisterial Reformers, and is far more likely to quote John Bunyan and John Edwards than Luther or Calvin. And even regarding the Puritans, MacArthur has disagreements (again, eschatology being one). I guess you can say that MacArthur pretty much marches to his own beat, although there are some other guys that are very theologically similar to MacArthur like Albert Pendarvis.

"It seems the situation does not bother him too much because he invites leaders of this movement to speak at his conferences. Is he not connecting dots?"

Yes and no. There are some people that he considers problematic but are still willing to fellowship with, but others that he considers to be over the line and refuses to have anything to do with, with C.J. Mahaney and Mark Driscoll being in the latter category. In that way, he is pretty much no different from any other conservative evangelical. Also, though he had a widely publicized sit-down with John Piper, that was far short of an endorsement or a ministry partnership or anything like that, and he refused to retract his criticisms of Piper's theology and methodology. So again, he marches to his own beat.

I fully agreed with MacArthur's criticisms of the YRR. It needed to be said, and if anything it didn't go far enough.

P.S. Non-Calvinists have "heroes" of their own with flaws of their own. Please remember that.

Job

@the Old Adam:

You have repeated a common charge against MacArthur, including from those who claim that he teaches "Lordship Salvation." However, I hear plenty of teachings on assurance from MacArthur. He merely states that your assurance comes from your fruit-bearing. It is a totally Biblical doctrine that is widely taught by ministers on both sides of the Calvin/Wesley divide, including those who state that bearing fruits via winning converts with effective Bible based evangelism is one of the fruits shown by those who are actually converted. Merely because MacArthur is not shy about proclaiming John 14:15 and other texts like it doesn't mean that he doesn't teach assurance.

Now I don't agree with everything that MacArthur teaches, but I personally find the idea that he doesn't teach assurance to be a false charge.

Lydia

JOb, Thanks for your comment! I agree that McArthur tends to march to his own drum.

"Yes and no. There are some people that he considers problematic but are still willing to fellowship with, but others that he considers to be over the line and refuses to have anything to do with, with C.J. Mahaney and Mark Driscoll being in the latter category."

I thought he might have been referring to Driscoll (Vid is 2 years old) when he was referring to YRR who act like "Arminians" (whatever that means). As to Mahaney, correct if I am wrong, but hasn't he within the last few years shared stages with him or invited him to speak some? I don't have time to look it up but I am pretty sure I saw that somewhere.

"P.S. Non-Calvinists have "heroes" of their own with flaws of their own. Please remember that."

Not me. I am anti guru all the way. I think it is dangerous business for the guru and the guruee. :o) I prefer Bereans.

Lydia

Job,

McArthur is doing T4G 2014. Which is basically an affirmation of Mahaney in real speak. Maybe Mahaney can do a panel discussion on using the 1st Amendment (or not depending on how it goes) to protect pedophiles?

Job

Lydia:

Thanks for the information. How disappointing. I thought that MacArthur drew the line at people who reject cessationism like Piper and Mahaney. Oh well, like you said, we Christians should have no heroes (except Christ of course)! I am not at all pleased at how you can be a charismatic/Pentecostal type like Piper/Mahaney/Grudem or an evolutionist like Tim Keller and a bunch of "evangelical" Anglicans but still be accepted in these circles so long as you claim to be a Calvinist/Reformed. That is a real problem that needs to be addressed.

Mary

"...so long as you claim to be a Calvinist/Reformed."

Isn't that amazing how welcoming the Calvinist/Reformed in the SBC are to everyone claiming to be Calvinist/Reformed outside the SBC and yet we have a schism within the SBC. It's almost like they have a litmus test of cooperation that would exclude a large majority of the SBC.

Stephen

Peter, no problem.

The comments to this entry are closed.