Charisma: To My Fundamentalist Brother John MacArthur: Grace to You Too

MacArthur and other cessationists DO NOT believe God’s miracle working power has ended. See MacArthur’s wife’s dramatic recovery from an automobile accident as an example that he talks about. What cessationists believe is that NO MAN HAS A SPIRITUAL GIFT to do miracles or healings. There are no people today empowered by the Holy Spirit to regularly perform miracles or healings.

Really not too bad as a response from a Charismatic leader to John MacArthur’s conference. On CP MacArthur has been taken to task daily. I am glad that the author admitted that there are many “wacky practices” in Charismatic circles. But I am not sure that the argument, that these are kinks in the movement needing to be worked out, holds water. Pentecostalism has been in existence for over 100 years. The Charismatic movement has been in existence for 50 years. Charismatic groups seem to have an abundance of theological, financial, moral and other problems with which they struggle. It just doesn’t stop. I am convinced, like John MacArthur, that the problem lies with the doctrine (or the playing-down of biblical doctrine) in the movement. That is what causes the aberrations. We owe MacArthur a debt of gratitude for his firm teaching on this subject over the years.

…to keep the Wizard of Oz busy for weeks on end. A common meme among those offended by MacArthur’s teaching is that he sent them all to hell (claiming that no Pentecostals or Charismatics are believers). This is patently and demonstratably untrue, as a quick perusal of his works will bear out.

…I wonder how many of my fellow fundys are sorely vexed to see J Mac referred to as “fundamentalist”.

I’m sorely vexed that you use the term “sorely vexed.”

Don’t worry Andrew, there are plenty of journalists and other media people who would call Grady a Fundamentalist without thinking twice about it.

[Andrew Comings]

…I wonder how many of my fellow fundys are sorely vexed to see J Mac referred to as “fundamentalist”.

Oh, I am grieved. Verily, my soul is burdened with the vexation that MacArthur as one of ‘us’ (WTMA*) ;)

____________________________________

* Whatever That Means Anymore

In my view, both sides of this debate — MacArthur versus Grady at Charisma — tend to be unfair in the way they overstate some of their points and criticize those with whom they disagree. Although I haven’t read Strange Fire, I have read Charismatic Chaos, and I have heard many of MacArthur’s criticisms of the Charismatic Movement, so I am familiar enough with his thinking not to believe for a second that he believes that all those who are a part of the Charismatic Movement are necessarily unbelievers or are going to hell.

On the other hand, on this particular issue at least, John MacArthur can have a tendency to use straw man arguments himself and to over-generalize in an unfair way. In fact, I have recently posted my disagreement with him for this very thing here:

John MacArthur Misses the Point in “Providing Cover to Charismatics” Video

In that post, I disagree with the way MacArthur unfairly lumps “open-but-cautious” men in with the charismatics. In fact, I am saddened that he would unnecessarily offend so many men who would actually agree with him on so many of his criticisms of the Charismatic Movement.

At any rate, even though I am myself quite adamantly opposed to “Charismania,” I think both sides of the divide need to be more careful in their criticisms. It doesn’t do any of us any good when we unfairly criticize others.

Praise the Lord for John’s stand on this issue, regardless of the label. John is militant about doctrine. We should admire him for this. He is going to take heat for the conference. We should defend him in this battle.

So, as i click on this article, what ad comes up on the Charisma web site?

Joseph Prince, advertising his recent heretical book. If you aren’t familiar, his previous book was “Destined to Reign: The Secret to Effortless Success, Wholeness and Victorious Living.”

So the previous editor of Charisma wants to take John to the woodshed while seeing the organization he made his income from, and still uses to promote his books, makes money off of heresy.

While there are few prominent pastors for whom I have as much respect, in my view we should not simply defend John MacArthur, regardless of how he goes about making his point, simply because he is attempting to defend the faith. When he is wrong or unfair, we should says so. It doesn’t help the cause of truth to be unfair in our criticisms of others, hence my previous post.

With all the emotional outrage in social media cast on someone named Chuck Phelps for decisions he made years ago, why is their no equal outrage over the many times sick and dying Christians are abused by professing believers who are charismatics? How many times has it played out where a dying Christian has lost most or all bodily function and at the end of life is clinging to the one sure foundation, Jesus Christ. Their faith and expectation that Christ will honor His promises, and the work of the Holy Spirit as comforter. Then into the hospital room walks Zophar, Bildad, and Eliphaz, members of the local charismatic church to proclaim that the dying brother has anemic faith? The one thing the person has left, these brothers want to take away, leaving them with both physical defeat as well as spiritual defeat at the time in life when support from the church is most critical. Where is the outrage over this sort of behavior? If charismatic leaders wish to say that this sort of behavior is only within the fringe elements of the movement, then why do they not lead and call this out for what it is?

PastorK,

So far I have listened only to the opening conference message by MacArther, Strange Fire. Can you site an example in the message where John was unfair or wrong, or engaged in straw-man argumentation?

Darrell,

I was referring specifically to my previous post entitled “Both sides tend to be unfair in their criticisms …” In that post I linked to a particular example I had in mind here:

John MacArthur Misses the Point in “Providing Cover to Charismatics” Video

That is what I was talking about.

Keith

ok, within that link I find this paragraph:

For example, MacArthur wonders why many “prominent, faithful, blessed preachers and theologians” would say that they are open to charismatic phenomena such as tongues, prophecy, healing, etc. He wonders what motivates them, and he suggests a couple of possibilities in response to his own rhetorical question. After he states, “I don’t know what the heart motive is,” he nevertheless suggests a couple of possible motives. First he suggests that “maybe it’s love and acceptance,” but with a tone and in a context that leaves one thinking that he means “maybe it’s love and acceptance devoid of a proper concern for the truth of God’s Word.” Then he suggests that “maybe it’s kind of a personal longing for something more in their spiritual life,” again with a tone and in a context that leaves one thinking that he means “maybe it’s a desire for subjective experiences divorced from a proper concern for the truth of God’s Word.”

I don’t know if its a big deal to suggest some possible motivations. Sounds to me like John is speculating about the motives, and it sounds like the author of this paragraph is speculating about the motives regarding why John would speculate about motives. A lot of “maybes” and “thinkings” and “suggests” but I don’t see anything here that indicates MacArthur was wrong, used straw-man argumentation or was unfair.