Do you agree with John MacArthur, ‘I wouldn’t fight for religious freedom because I won’t fight for idolatry.’

John MacArthur is probably as close to a spokesperson for conservative evangelicals with a fundamentalist bent than anyone else, with the possible exception of Franklin Graham. Yet he is also noted for his controversial statements, some of which have created quite a stir and also get many of us to think rather than assume.

His recent statement, ‘I wouldn’t fight for religious freedom because I won’t fight for idolatry’, is quite unique. You can read the entire article from which this quotation is taken here: https://www.christianpost.com/news/john-macarthur-i-wouldnt-fight-for-religious-freedom.html?uid=fc4a38453f

It seems as though those “in the know” when it comes to missions would disagree with MacArthur, but I am speaking for them without being one of them.

To my way of thinking, religious freedoms is something I value as a Christian American, not just as a Christian. Still, when I think of how the Church of England Calvinists hybridized with the Anabaptists to form the Baptist movement (and many non-denoms in in that family including MacArthur), this makes me scratch my head, because, besides baptism, one of the beliefs the Baptists took from the Anabaptists was separation of church and state — and the idea of freely believing with one’s conscience. To my way of thinking, the natural outflow of that belief is that people must freely choose to believe or not to believe in Christ, and not believing means the option of believing something else.

To my way of thinking, if MacArthur is correct, then the whole Roger Williams freedom of religion thing is incorrect, as well as the similar viewpoint of the founding fathers. Thus the right to freedom of religion does not originate with our Creator and human rights, after all, are a product of society and not God-given. This is, for sure, an American thing, not a Biblical thing. Yet many of us embrace the concept while at the same time embracing Scripture.

The funding fathers were a mixed bag, but based upon MacArthur’s selectively-used views about working in conjunction with unbelievers to support religious freedom, we could have had no significant contributions to our constitution from Christians in the first place or even Christians in the legislature now, it seems. It seems to me that religious freedom is in the best interest of the church.

The church has often prospered while unfree. However, it is NOT true that the church always has prospered even without such freedom. Much of the territory controlled by Islam was at one time considered Christian territory — like Turkey, for example. And for centuries, the Gospel has not been preached there.

It is true, I think that too many Christians are looking for political solutions to spiritual matters, and I agree with MacAruthur that this takes Christians away from the path they should pursue. I try to avoid confusing the flag with the cross. though this is not always easy. The idea that God may call us to minister in a country that no longer recognizes freedom of religion is not unusual. But to take religious freedom away from believers because it is abused by false religions, to me, is not the way to go. This seems to be exactly what is happening in Russia.

MacArthur is near the top of my list when it comes to Christian leaders I respect and look up to, but not on this one: nyet.

Poll Results

Do you agree with John MacArthur, ‘I wouldn’t fight for religious freedom because I won’t fight for idolatry.’

I fully agree with MacArthur’s views on this matter. Votes: 0
I mostly agree with MacArthur’s views on this matter. Votes: 0
I am processing this issue and have not yet reached a conclusion. Votes: 3
I think MacArthur is mostly wrong about this. Votes: 7
I think MacArthur has completely missed the cushion on this issue. Votes: 6
I am not a MacArthur fan, and this is an example of why not. Votes: 4
Other Votes: 1