The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum "The Merger of Calvinism with Worldliness"

Yes, MacArthur was mentioned by name in the article. But further, it was mentioned that one of his staff was deeply involved with forming one of these outreach groups which includes much of what Dr. Masters criticized as worldly. The issue I think is a very simple one. MacArthur is a well-known figure, for better or worse. And like most of these individuals who have made a name for themselves, they have their groupies, er 'followers', that like sheep will accept just about anything he says as true and/or anything he does as God-honoring. Now, I am NOT implying you are one of his faithful followers. I'm simply stating the reality of things.

Thus, by his participation in these conferences, etc., he is implicitly giving his approval of all that goes on in them. IF... IF he does not approve of all the things that go on in these conferences, nor does he agree with how the sponsors/speakers conduct themselves, he is obligated to come right out publicly and state as much, i.e., he needs to disassociate himself from these other leaders and their methodologies. IF, however, he has no scruples as to the type of music played, the language used, the display of commandment-breaking apparel and manners, etc., then Dr. Masters' inclusion of him is more than justified. I personally know of at least one individual on MacArthur's staff who denies the Second Commandment has any application to representations of Christ, God, etc., and it only forbids the worship of idols. In short, he fully approves of Jesus t-shirts, actors portraying Christ in plays and movies, and all such blasphemous things.

Next, MacArthur certainly wouldn't be the first to come under fire for doing something without much fore-thought which caused people to complain. Think of James Packer... now who in the Reformed camp doesn't appreciate how much good that Packer has done over many decades? Think of his books, Knowing God, Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God, An Introductory Essay to the 'Death of Death in the Death of Christ', etc. But who can't forget his signing of "ECT"? And then there was his endorsement of the liberal Peter Kreeft's book, Ecumenical Jihad. However, at least Packer didn't approve of Roman Catholicism, nor did he agree with Kreeft's book, but where MacArthur stands in regard to the things being criticized by many that take place in these conferences, groups, and the main figures behind them is yet unknown to most of us.

Lastly, we are living in a day, it seems, where "giants" are falling away from the faith to varying degrees. There are those who were once highly-respected conservative professing Christians who have denied the faith entirely. There are others who have forsaken the faith once delivered to the saints and embraced Roman Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy. There are men/women who were 'notables' even within Reformed circles; Presbyterian, Baptists, Congregationalists, who lately have denied Sola Fide and embraced NPP, FV, Shepherdism or one of the other morphs of this damnable heresy. There are those who have attacked the divine inspiration of the Bible by teaching a new hermeneutic that will allegedly bring new light to our understanding of what the Bible really teaches, etc., etc., ad nauseam. So, let's not let our allegiances blind us to the fact that such things can and do happen even to the best of men. Generally, these "slides" don't happen in an instant but rather they happen gradually, in little steps which sometimes go unnoticed. Is John MacArthur one of those among many who is on a downward slippery road? I haven't a clue. But what I do know is that I am not so naive to think that John MacArthur is exempt from falling away, even completely. It is God Who raises up men and Who brings them down.

Let our eyes always be fixed on Jesus and not on earthly men.

In His grace,