3 Reasons the YRR Should Listen to John MacArthur

Two videos from a 2011 discussion with John MacArthur are gaining some traction again. In these videos MacArthur calls out the young Reformed guys that have adopted a Calvinistic soteriology but seem to be Arminian in everything else. He decries their worldliness; noting things like music, movies, beer, cursing, and even the pull to be and/or follow celebrity pastors. He also believes that the rise in “flat screen churches” stems from our catering to the larger culture. You can watch the videos below:

And part 2

My gut reaction to these videos is to place Dr. MacArthur as the leading candidate behind Twitter’s Church Curmudgeon. He simply seems ticked off at all these new fangled gadgets. In my opinion he is painting with a brush that is a bit too broad and making a mountain out of mole hills (like what clothes guys wear). The whole thing just rubs me the wrong way. 

Truth be told, I simply want to dismiss his words here. Which is why I should listen. Bad history is made by us young whippersnappers not listening to our elders, like MacArthur. As I continued listening to Dr. MacArthur I came to realize that there is a great deal of wisdom in his words. All of us YRR (Young, Restless, and Reformed) guys ought to heed his words here. He has earned our ear and we ought to listen.

Here are 3 reasons that we should listen to him:

1. We can wrongly assume that right theology, right cultural engagement, etc. will be a formula for reaching the lost. It does seem like even in Reformed circles there is a drive to figure out the code to reaching the lost.
2. We are prone to celebrity and rock-star pastoring. You really can’t shepherd from a flat screen*. We need to listen to this seasoned pastor about what it really means to be a shepherd.
3. Ecclesiology is not unrelated to soteriology. Ecclesiology is not clay that we can mold however we want. It is just as much revealed truth as our soteriology.

Let’s not too quickly dismiss this dear brother. He has words that we need to heed.

---

*I realize that there is more to the debate about multi-site churches. It’s not quite as black and white as MacArthur has presented it. But his point is worthy of serious consideration.

Review of Slave by John MacArthur

Did you know that the Bible you own is more than likely involved in a cover-up of biblical proportions?  According to John MacArthur “centuries ago, English translators perpetrated a fraud in the New Testament, and it’s been purposely hidden and covered up ever since.  Your own Bible is probably included in the cover-up!” 

What is that cover up?  The use of the word servant instead of slave.  The slave/master relationship is the key to understanding a right relationship with God.  In fact, MacArthur believes that if this is understood many of his earlier works would have been moot (2).  Through thirteen chapters MacArthur explores the theme of the slave/master relationship in the hopes that our relationship with the Lord would be more fulfilling and correct.

I am conflicted at how to review this book.  I have learned a ton from John MacArthur.  He certainly loves the Lord and has an enduring ministry that is passionate about proclaiming the truth of God’s Word.  At times his tone will put many people off.  This same conflict is present in this book.  In my opinion, MacArthur is a very faithful expositor, but is often given to overstatement and his tone can be quite off-putting.

Take this as an example.  On the back cover it refers to this idea of being a slave as an “essential and clarifying revelation that may be keeping you from a fulfilling—and correct—relationship with God.”  Fair enough.  But check out what MacArthur says on page 1.  Referring to this concept of slave/master relationship he says it, “escaped me and almost everyone else”.  So, are we to conclude from this that until 2007 (when he discovered this) that his relationship with the Lord was incorrect and unfulfilling? 

Now granted, these are probably just sensationalistic comments on the back cover to try to sell a book.  MacArthur tends to tone down the “cover-up” language even in the beginning.  But these overstatements, in my opinion, make the book almost non-credible.  Honestly, if I had not been given this book for free from Thomas Nelson in exchange for a review, I would not have purchased this book because of this sensationalism. 

However, once I was able to get past the ridiculous overstatements on the back cover and beginning of the book it was actually pretty good.  The first couple of chapters may be worth the cost of the book.  What MacArthur says here is indeed true, the image of the believer as a slave is missing from much of our Christianity. 

I hope that this book gets the ball rolling on that discussion.  I hope that others pick up this work by MacArthur and add to it.  There is much that is commendable in this work but also a decent amount that is missing.  I was really intrigued in the beginning of the book and longing to see some application of what this looks like in the Christian life.  But honestly, it seems that the discussion only touched on the typical MacArthur polemics.  I’m convinced that MacArthur is right about the importance of this topic—and it’s more important than just serving as a polemic against those MacArthur disagrees with. 

This book is certainly worthy of buying.  In fact I hope many of you do buy this book so that you can read it, interact with it, and move this conversation along.  MacArthur’s name tagged onto this book will cause people to begin looking at and discussing this biblical metaphor.  This is a good place to start but it certainly is not the place you want to end. 

You can buy it for under 15 bucks at Amazon .

Rating 3 out 5 stars

This Week in Blogworld 4/17

John MacArthur confronts explicit teaching on Song of Solomon. (AKA Mark Driscoll) Read part 1, 2, 3, and 4.

The more I read the writings of Kevin DeYoung the more I appreciate him. He has begun a series (that is almost finished) on our high places. In these he is focusing on our idolatrous blind spots. Read The lack of Psalm singing, Worldliness in entertainment, The idol of youth, and Our lack of church discipline. Part 5 should be up some time within the next day or so.

Did Christ Have Gray Hair? Turns out your answer is more important than you think…

Great words from Dr. Moore: The Devil is a Boring Preacher: The High Stakes of Dull Sermons. Here is an excerpt: “If lost people don’t like your message because they’re hostile to the gospel, you’re in good company. But if you’re boring the people of God with the Word of God, something has gone seriously awry. It may be that you preach just like the devil, and that you don’t even know it.”

It sure is sad that Piper is defiling himself by having such conferences as this: Advance ‘09. UPDATE: I apologize for not being initially clear--I'm being silly by saying Piper is defiling himself by having such a conference as this. I think Advance '09 will be awesome. I even would love to attend--but will probably not be able to. So, sorry if anyone misunderstood and thinks I'm hating on the Advance conference.

Nathan White wonders why we have “altars”…I’ve wondered the same thing.

JT points us to an interview with Paul Tripp about marriage.

This is powerful:

Cardboard Stories from The Austin Stone on Vimeo.

HT: Jared

Quotes from T4G

On his blog, Matt Schmucker gave his three favorite quotes from John MacArthur at Together For The Gospel

"1. "Soft preaching makes for hard people."
2. "Preachers are the only ones in the world who can take no credit for everything we do (except the mistakes)."
3. "It's not about how cool you are, but how clear you are."

If I remember correctly, MacArthur also pointed out that "Hard preaching makes for soft hearts/people."

Today in Blogworld 12/17

The first article I read this morning is probably the most sad. Dr. Mohler addresses a new agenda-filled T-shirt worn by toddlers. The T-shirt reads "My Daddy's name is Donor". No, that's not Donner, one of the 8 reindeer; it is a reference to a sperm donor. What is communicated to this little guy is that his daddy does not matter. Mohler sites Catherine Bruton of The Times in London who says: The T-shirt is offered by a company called Family Evolutions, founded by a lesbian couple whose son modelled the shirt. The co-founder, Stacey Harris, says that the T-shirt is empowering. "We want to lift the taboo surrounding donor conception so that kids don't feel that their coming into the world is a shameful secret," she says. "Kids who are empowered will grow up well-adjusted." Despite my concern over the political agenda behind this, I am most pained for this little child and the host of other little boys. What does it communicate to a male child when he is told that daddy doesn't matter? It means men do not matter. It means your masculinity does not matter. Truly sad.

John Piper reminds us that we need to feel homesick: "The likelihood of dying because you are a Christian is closer than it used to be for Americans. The freedom from such threats has generally existed in this country for a tiny portion of history (about 400 years). We have gotten used to it. It seems like the way things must be. So our first reaction to the threat that things might be otherwise is often anger. But that anger may be a sign that we have lost our sense of being aliens and exiles (“Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles . . .” 1 Peter 2:11). Perhaps we have settled in too much to this world and this country in particular. We don't feel as homesick for Christ as Paul did..." Continue reading

In Acts29/MBC news, Founders has posted an interview with Kevin Larson. Larson is one of the 3 churches that will be deeply affected by this decision. The St. Louis Post has ran an article as well. My friend Sam of Believers Church, also deeply impacted by this decision, was interview for this article. My only regret is that in the Post article the author refers to these churches as "Emerging". That is not helpful to the discussion.

Josh Harris has parts two and three now posted on his affluenza series.

Pulpit Magazine attempts to answer a very good question about being unequally yoked: Question: Some people have told me that being unequally yoked is talking exclusively about marriage. Others have said that it applies also to business partnerships and other situations. Could you please expand on this? What does it mean to be unequally yoked and what type of a guideline should I have if it is okay for me to have a business partnership with a non-believer? Read the answer here.

And finally Thabiti Anyabwile, from Pure Church, tackles the Satan (I mean Santa) Claus debate. I am hoping that my friend Will accepts my invite to begin writing on this blog. If he does I would love to see him address this issue--I appreciate his stance on Christmas. As for Thabiti he says Down with Santa Claus. Here is his conclusion: "I'm not arguing a dogmatic causality here. I'm simply asking the question, "Why include Santa Claus at all?" Is the imagined upside of following the culture here worth what we think it's worth? And are our justifications helping us to point our children to Christ or masking the reality that we may be pointing our children away from Him? Personally, I doubt Santa Claus is worth it, and pointing our kids away from Jesus at Christmas may be the worst form of child neglect I can imagine."