What We Can Learn from the John MacArthur Beth Moore Battle

You can make anyone say anything if you soundbite and distort media clips.

Given that Tom Buck is a big supporter of Founders Ministries and the way they slandered and attacked others in the original By What Standard trailer, I would be super careful about buying anything that Buck is selling, especially if it’s soundbites and video snippets.

Let’s also admit that shock-jock tactics and scaring Christians into agreement against “the liberals” isn’t supposed to characterize Christian discourse. Fearmongering is a sin too.

Do you think CRT has value in analyzing western culture. Yes or No.

So quoting Beth Moore’s exact words as she spoke them in a video Bible lesson is now slander? This is beginning to sound like a liberal’s accusation of hate speech. If I don’t like what you say or the way you said it, it’s hate speech. Never mind whether the statement is true or false.

If it has been taken out of context, please show us the context so we can see this for ourselves. Otherwise, the exact words speak for themselves loud and clear. Beth Moore claims the God speaks to her directly, even to the extent of telling her to write down what God sad to her. That is dangerous error.

Quoting things out of context with an axe to grind IS slander, GN. This is not complicated, and the axe to grind on the part of Mr. Buck is pretty clear. One does not need to do an entire exegesis of Mrs. Moore’s entire talk to figure this out.

Mark: I don’t understand CTS well, but I do think that if Mr. MacArthur is going to speak on the subject, he ought to learn the topic so that people like Joel at least agree that he knows “from Shinola” on the topic. Don’t you think?

Jon Pratt addressed this issue in the latest Nick that came out this morning. Here’s a snippet:

When talking to fellow believers who embrace the same gospel message (and thus denying that Jesus’s words to the religious rulers of His day and the apostles’ words to false teachers are models for us in regard to this present subject), we are called to use edifying speech that gives grace to the hearer (Eph 4:29), that is seasoned with salt (Col 4:6), and that is characterized by gentleness and respect (1 Pet 3:16). May God give us the wisdom, skill, and tact to use our words well. And in this present circumstance may we keep from giving opponents cause to question our mental capacities, compassion, gentleness, and biblically correct complementarian viewpoints.

I’d agree with Bert and Tyler - those people who knock Beth Moore generally really do need to start by reading what she’s saying and not relying on screenshots and tweets from others who use controversies to sell videos, books, and “masculine Christianity” or whatever else.

I’ve been asking for someone to demonstrate that Moore’s words should not be understood as meaning she thinks she receives direct revelation from heaven. So far, no one has documented an alternate explanation. I’ve only heard several assertions that she’s being taken out of context, etc., but nothing to explain why this is so. If Burk’s tweets are taking Beth Moore out of context, surely someone should be able to provide evidence.

There’s a lady at church who says God told her to stop smoking. Should I record her words, interrogate her mercilessly, and shun her because she thinks she receives direct revelation from God? Or, should I put a more charitable interpretation on her words? What would people think of me if they objected to my attacks, and I said, “this is an important theological point to clarify!” Would they think I was being a self-righteous jerk?

Charity is lacking, I believe.

But Tyler, why should believers be charitable towards each other, especially when Beth has already addressed the Praying God’s Word issue herself on her blog?

Here’s the post:

For those needing further information on the removal of some of my words (not God’s words but my own) from the chapter I’d written on “Overcoming Sexual Strongholds” in the prayer book Praying God’s Word:

When I wrote PGW many years ago, I exceeded Scripture and singled out same-sex sin as particularly satanic.

As the years passed, I increasingly winced at what I’d conveyed but the basic rule of thumb in authorship is that it is better not to go back and edit an old book but, rather, let it just phase out and simply don’t make the same mistake in the future. The problem was, because PGW is a handbook and not a regular nonfiction book, it didn’t phase out in the same way. I have had many years to test the fruit of what I wrote and have seen over and over again that numerous readers, who had gone to this chapter with their struggles, came to my words and proceeded no further. My words had kept them from God’s words. That, to me, is a pretty serious stumbling block.

I also heard from some heartbroken mothers about their kids who were having a hard enough time feeling ostracized as it was. This prayer book sits on the bedside tables and on the shelves in many Christian homes. Picture a 13 year old struggling with an onslaught of sexual feelings and temptations who has no idea what to do with them. The child picks up the book and reads my words, only, in this case, comes to the conclusion that he or she is particularly demonic. Not only is that devastating to the child. It is not even biblical.

I hold firmly to a traditional Christian sexual ethic and continue to believe the Bible sets apart marriage as a covenant between a man and a woman. But I also believe that Scripture clearly teaches that all sex outside of marriage is contrary to God‘s will.

Here is what I would want that 13-year-old to know:

I want that kid to know that the author of that book, Praying God’s Word, has been forgiven for more sins than that kid can fathom. I want that kid to know my gracious and merciful Savior, Jesus, and that I would have had reasons in my past to have been thrown out of the camp under Old Testament law if not stoned to death. By the power of the cross of Christ, I live. By His grace alone, I serve.

This may not have been the action you would have taken. I understand. But I came to a place that I believed it was the best action for me to take and I stand by it. In the words of the apostle Paul in Phil.2:11, we’re all faced with working out our own salvation in fear and trembling. None of this has been void of fear and trembling before God.

Lastly, I must tell you that I’m weary of our blind spots. Weary of my own. Here is what I no longer have the stomach for after the last several years: the hypocrisy burgeoning from hyper fundamentalist Christianity. I do not lack a Scriptural view of sin. I just believe in a longer list of serious sins than some.

“Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.” (Galatians 5:19-21)

In Christ,

Beth Moore

But it’s probably too much to ask people to investigate things rather than gather a lynch mob and ‘prove’ she’s guilty on the basis of suspicion and innuendo.

There’s a lady at church who says God told her to stop smoking. Should I record her words, interrogate her mercilessly, and shun her because she thinks she receives direct revelation from God? Or, should I put a more charitable interpretation on her words?

Why are these the only two options? Why not ask what she means and teach some on revelation?

And is this lady going around teaching in churches and seminars influencing others after careful study? Isn’t this connected to the point James 3:1? She is not teaching anyone. Those who teach others should be held to a higher standard.

I don’t think anyone has interrogated Moore mercilessly. If reports are correct, she won’t allow it.

What would people think of me if they objected to my attacks, and I said, “this is an important theological point to clarify!” Would they think I was being a self-righteous jerk?

They might. Is there a reason they might think that? Or do they see you as a person with careful theological precision who loves people and teaches truth? That probably has a lot to do with relationships and history with people.

The time, place, and manner in which you teach this certainly matters. But an personal comment by a “regular church member” should be viewed as an entirely different matter from someone who holds himself or herself up as a teacher and who asks others to hold himself or herself up as a teacher. More is required.

What Beth Moore book should I read that showcases all her faults; that exposes her as a false teacher?

I will read and review it at SI. I admit I’ve never read one of her books. Presumably, some people here condemn her based on first-hand reading of her false teaching, and not YouTube excerpts or tweets … so I assume it will be simple to suggest a book for me to read.

I just realized that I have access to a copy of Praying God’s Word; it’s the 2004 printing so it will include the disputed quote. I’ll borrow it and write a review for SI. I may do any other books that someone else can suggest as proof of her false teachings.

I thought this thread would focus more on the fact that the FBFI’s President criticized Pastor John MacArthur for how he spoke out against the female preacher Beth Moore.

MacArthur has now been criticized by the FBFI both for being too soft on New Evangelicals (https://fbfi.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Complete-Resolutions-2010.pdf — Resolution 85.09) and for being too hard on them!

There’s a big difference between a lady at church and a nationally known Bible teacher saying, “The Lord told me this.” The language reveals a poor understanding of the doctrine of inspiration. The Bible is the only reliable source of divine revelation. The church lady’s statement can be excused because of poor teaching. In time, she should grow in her understanding of the difference between what the Lord actually said, and how Christians perceive divine leading. However, a respected Bible teacher should know the difference and communicate it clearly. When she doesn’t, many thousands are encouraged in a deficient understanding.

But when the teacher adds, “And He told me to write this down,” the error grows larger. It’s hard to understand that statement to mean anything less than “what the Lord told me is divine revelation, and I need to write it down to remember it exactly and share it with others so they will know what God said.” Our impression of divine leading does not rise to that level. We “feel” as if the Lord is leading in a certain direction. We weigh that impression until it gains a degree of certainty. We don’t write down our impressions as if they constitute divine revelation. The “write this down” statement sounds like something a dangerous charismatic would say. If a nationally known preacher like, say John MacArthur, made a statement like that, the same ones who are giving Beth Moore a pass would be all over him in a heart beat. He should know better! Hmmm. Are you giving Moore a pass because she’s a woman? Is it OK for her to be more touchy feely and imprecise? Now that’s an interesting twist. Should women Bible teachers be evaluated by a lower standard than men? (Now watch the fur hit the fan!)

How many of you have made bad theological statements, or failed to properly nuance a statement or two in sermons? How would pastors here react if people spent untold hours pouring over audio files from your church websites, and compiled quotes that “showed” your false teaching over a period of many, many years? What if you didn’t even know these people? Would you graciously respond? Or, would you dismiss them as deranged people who didn’t deserve a response?

I am waiting on a recommendation for a book Moore wrote that showcases her false teaching.

Remember this:

• Don’t criticize a Christian for false teaching unless you’ve read her written work and have seen it yourself
• Don’t rely on secondary sources for your information - or else you’re no better than the KJVO guys who rail against things they’ve only heard filtered through Sam Gipp.
• For example, I have not criticized Andy Stanley because I have not read his book or watched his sermon series on “unhitching” the OT. I also haven’t criticized Revoice because I haven’t watched a session. I’ve heard plenty of secondary info, though. I’m worried, but I won’t discuss it online until I check it for myself.

Do you think CRT has value in analyzing western culture. Yes or No.

Your binary question is not helpful because it sets up an overly simplistic, shallow, knee-jerk response to a very complex theory (and not an easy subject to digest) that is layered with the good, bad, and the ugly. And even the “good” depends upon how you define CT and CRT and your Biblical Worldview.

As I asked you before, “how are you studying CRT? Original sources? Secondary Sources? Whatever it may be, how are you planning on avoiding the misunderstandings and misrepresentations that MacArthur and others have done in their sloppy, biased research?” With your secondary sources, have you read either Shenvi https://shenviapologetics.com/topics/ or Mason? https://alsoacarpenter.com

From my observations of you and many (such as MacArthur and Founders) who think they have a sufficient understanding of CT or CRT to apply towards socially conscience Conservative Evangelicals are actually making matters much worse and end up falsely accusing the wrong people of compromise. You come across with an “If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it’s most likely a duck” surface mentality of CT/CRT towards the ones whom you think made theological compromises within conservative evangelicalism, which leads to multiple hasty generalizations. The problem is that surface appearances can be deceiving. A duck that waddles and quacks but runs on batteries is definitely not a real duck. Therefore, we should exercise some restraint in whom we call out until we do all the necessary hard work of determining what the author/speaker actually means, instead of what MacArthur and others have done when they’ve subjectively brought their own pre-determined meaning into the author’s writings.