Servant of the Word and Flock

Servant of the Word and Flock

174. JOHN MacArruur: SERVANT OF THE WorD AND FLOCK 'I am twenty-six years old', writes a young man from Omaha, 'and I realize that I have been raised in an era of "baby" preaching and weak doctrine. I am so thankful for your program and I pray God continues to speak through you.'

The comment of the youngest that I saw was from a five-yearold, although not written by him but reported by his father: My five-year-old son and three-year-old daughter were fighting the other day. My wife told them to go and think about what God would want them to do to get along better. A few minutes later my son had the answer: 'Listen to more John MacArthur', he said!

Letters come from all parts of the world and all kinds of situations. A listener in Austria said: 'I am so grateful that I found you on the Internet (my son did, actually). Your series on "The Disciples' Prayer" radically changed my attitude towards prayer and the way I used to pray" A woman in Germany wrote: 'I was nearly brought to despair looking for solid scriptural food in today's anything-goes Christianity. I want to say a heartfelt thanks for your dedication and hard work.'

A man from near Philadelphia whose twenty-six-year-old wife had recently died from lung disease, leaving three infants, wrote: My father gave me one of your sermons dealing with trials.

I began listening to Grace to You and slowly began understanding God's love to us. God has used your teaching to guide me through the darkest days and hours of my life.

From Venezuela a man reported: 'I make a point of listening to your broadcast every chance I get, and I take vigorous notes so that I can share these studies with others in my church.

Gracia a Vosotros [is helping] mould and shape our spiritual

A Basket of Letters

lives. A Filipino, working in Saudi Arabia, wrote to say, 'Mr

John, your web site 1s a great blessing for me, and I know many here are also blessed by your ministry.' The same news came from Iraq where, in a letter reporting his daily listening to Grace to You on the internet, a US Army lieutenant added, 'If you could forward this to John so he can know that he is reaching and blessing soldiers in Iraq, I would appreciate it.'

Correspondents often refer to the particular subjects that helped them. Another US service man in Iraq said: 'Your commitment to telling the truth of God's Word and not compromising that truth has been used of God to build me up in times of trouble.' The sinfulness of sin was a subject on which numbers commented. The way he addressed one particular sin, drew this memorable letter from a woman: I was saved in 1999 from a homosexual lifestyle. I left that life behind me and have not looked back. I do, however, still feel guilty at times. About a year after I got saved, I began attending the church my whole family attends. The pastor is well acquainted with my family and knows my background. In the seven years I attended that church, I never heard that a homosexual could be saved. They mocked and made fun of homosexuals, but that was about it. I left that church a year ago and have been listening to you every day for almost a year. I listened to your message titled, 'What God Thinks of Homosexuals', and I just cried when I heard you say God loves homosexuals, and they can be saved. I have to tell you how much your daily broadcasts have helped me grow.

A woman from Portsmouth, Virginia, wrote:

Countless times the Holy Spirit has ministered to me through your broadcast. I thank God for you. On one occasion in particular, when you were on the subject of false prophets, God really used you to bless me with His wisdom and understanding. You see, I was in the midst of a church at that time where there were indeed some of the false prophets spoken of in the Bible. After much prayer, and God speaking to me through Scripture and in my quiet time, your broadcast confirmed to me God's revelation.

Several letters speak of new understanding gained on the subject of assurance. A couple from Fresno, California, wrote: My husband and I thank God for putting on your heart the 'Doctrines of Grace' series. It has literally changed our lives. We have prayed and prayed that God would give us assurance of our salvation . . . Only eternity will show the huge impact this series has had and is having on other folks like us who have been seeking assurance of their salvation.

A man of forty-two years recounts how, after being a nominal believer, he had recently received Christ. But many little temptations to doubt persisted and I longed to understand the truth of His words and to glorify Him. Then one day I happened to turn on WECU and I heard you speak. I could not believe what began to happen. You made the Word of God come alive in my mind, and you slowly peeled back forty-two years of questioning and doubt. I am still very human but Satan has lost.

A broadcast series on the sovereign grace of God and election drew a number of comments. "Thank you from the bottom of my heart, wrote a man from Buffalo, NY. 'Listening to Pastor John stand on God's Word as he preached on election was both humbling and encouraging, and it fills me with grateful thanks.' Another wrote: 'Your sermons on election and God's sovereignty have totally changed my perspective on salvation.'

As this broadcast series began, a student at Palm Beach Atlantic

University wrote to say how relevant it was to discussions going on among them: Recently the topic of Calvinism came up. I simply want to thank you for tackling this subject. As you can imagine, Pll be listening to these podcasts on my 1Tunes daily, along with my roommate and other college dorm mates. Thank you, John, for your example and your unwavering commitment to the clear truth of Scripture.

Pastors and Christian workers often speak of the help they have received to give to others. With MacArthur's help, one man was able to teach a weekly Bible study through Romans to fifty Japanese nationals in Tokyo. Another engaged in prison ministry, and leading about eighty-five men in a Bible Study group, expressed his gratitude for the 'better understanding of God's Word' he had gained by the ministry of Grace to You. He also spoke of how the MacArthur Study Bible was being widely used among the men in the penitentiary.

A prison inmate in Ohio wrote:

The studies on Grace to You have helped me grow in the faith a great deal. You've helped me to learn to study and maintain the integrity of the Word of God. There have been times when the messages were so convicting I almost turned them off the radio, but the Holy Spirit bore witness to the facts. Pm glad I did listen. I have seen a major change in my life over the past two years that has come by the grace of God.

From a woman in Wisconsin came these words: It has been eighteen months since leaving a worldwide cult. Grace to You tapes, books, and radio programs have been instrumental in building my relationship with Jesus

Christ, helping me to understand what it means to be saved by grace alone, and to love and serve others.!

A Baptist pastor from Kansas testified how the Bible preaching had widened his vision of things: 'You know how we "Baptists" are about non-Baptist churches. Well, let me say, these days are over, Grace Community Church has made the difference.'

From Arkansas a pastor wrote:

Recently I read your books The Gospel According to the Apostles and The Gospel According to Jesus. | have always had trouble with the easy-believism taught today in most evangelical churches, yet I could never put my finger on the specific problem with it. Your teaching on salvation has helped me tremendously. I have been sharing what I have been learning with my wife. Recently I preached my first message where I began to explain that salvation is more than believing a few facts about Jesus. I took my congregation through | John 1-2. They were amazingly silent, yet they were listening intently.

A very similar letter came from Tennessee:

I am the pastor of a small, rural, African-American church. But I found the principles you shared in your book, Hard to Believe, to be of universal significance to the Christian church. As a matter of fact I incorporated these teachings into our Wednesday night Bible study. We all discovered that there is a high cost to following Jesus . . . I realize that God is worthy of all the glory, but I thank you for allowing Him to reach our congregation through you.

' This letter and the previous one were quoted in a Grace to You letter.

A Roman Catholic priest writes from New Orleans, to tell

MacArthur how he had come to know Christ as Lord and Saviour ten years earlier, fourteen years after his ordination to the priesthood: Since then I have become 'addicted' to Sacred Scripture. I have been listening to your radio broadcast for about five years now. I have all your study guides and several of your books and pamphlets . . . Last week I was invited to be the speaker at a Jesuit retreat on the banks of the Mississipp1. I based my talks (eleven, thirty-minute talks) very heavily on your book The Gospel According to Jesus. There were 111 men in attendance. The director of the Retreat House told me that in all the time he had been there, he had not heard such praise for and enthusiasm about the talks.

This correspondence also reveals that it is by no means only

Christians who listen to the broadcasts. Not infrequently unbelievers listen without intending to do so. A woman was listening to Grace to You when her husband came in unexpectedly for lunch. As he was very antagonistic to the gospel, her initial reaction was to turn the radio off so that he would not become angry, but something kept her from doing that. He began to listen, was gripped by the Word of God, and started to listen to Grace to You daily. Within two weeks he came home and told his wife that he had trusted the Lord Jesus as his Saviour.

A man from Michigan was raised in a Muslim family, and after the death of his father and a period of rebellion and drugs, he started to seek God: I started my journey in a mosque. I went there many times to ask for literature and to pray. Every time I went I felt more of a void. I was disgusted with my life and felt I was the lowest of all men... One day I was driving and heard something about Christ on the radio, and I sensed I was being drawn to God. I cannot explain it—I just knew I was being drawn. I remember telling God something significant: I called Him 'Lord'. This was significant to me because Muslims never call our God 'Lord'. I promised the Lord I would go to church, which I did, and I started reading the Bible. At some time—I don't know when—I was born again by the grace of God, and I was baptized... Lhope to become a pastor. I love listening to Grace to You—Im comforted by your messages. My family and I are persecuted a lot, especially by other relatives. We will not bend in our faith. We live by the Word of God and are not ashamed.

A forty-three-year old black American from Tennessee wrote of how he had turned away from Christianity under the influence of the Black Power movement.

I bought into the teaching against a 'white' Jesus, and the pro-Black teachings became my religion . . . When I first heard you on radio about nine years ago, I thought to myself, 'I really don't like this guy and what he is saying.' I was pretty sure you were white. Then one day I heard you preach on forgiveness of sins and love, and the veil was lifted from my eyes. Up until then, I had never truly heard the gospel preached, never truly understood the holiness of God. The Word of God began to have an incredible impact on me as I listened to your preaching daily. By God's grace, Pve been living for Him, studying His Word, and listening to your broadcast for the last nine years. wie

Perhaps the most important subject in all these letters has not yet been mentioned. I find it repeated in many places, and it is more closely connected with the influence of this ministry than can be estimated in this world. I refer to such comments as these: 'I keep you in my prayers daily Dr MacArthur'; 'I am praying always that our God will continue to shower you with wisdom and goodness'; 'I continue to give you my prayers and support'; 'My family is praying for your ministry.'

The Apostle Paul needed the intercession of Christian people for his work, and so do all faithful men. 'My people pray for me', was Spurgeon's comment on the fruitfulness of his work.

The blessing of God on the preaching of John MacArthur is a testimony to the God who hears and answers prayer.'

One final thought 1s also too important to miss. There are no pressured appeals for money from Grace to You. Yet the work could not continue without the numbers of those who share in the ministry by their giving. Among the consequences of that support has been the opportunity it gives of extending help to those of very limited resources. It has been moving for me to read the gratitude of such individuals—ranging from pastors in small churches, to men in penitentiaries. Such words as the following are not uncommon: 'My family has been very blessed by the free resources we have received.' 'How do I say thanks for such kindness? Thank you, thank you, thank you.'

? While preparing these pages in Britain, where MacArthur has been broadcasting six days a week since 1987, a young man told me of how, at the age of fifteen, John MacArthur's preaching led to his conversion. I heard of a man of 101 years, long unaccustomed to evangelical preaching, who had come to listen every Sunday night. His funeral took place on the day I typed these words. A Christian widow, whom we often visit, makes it a practice to stop everything at 7 pm each evening to listen to MacArthur teaching the truth. Who can say how many thousands of such stories might be repeated?

An incident illustrates how Grace to You seeks to operate. A woman wrote to say she had been a listener for nearly ten years, but, while she continued to be blessed by listening, she would no longer be able to send financial support. Her husband had recently suffered a stroke. On behalf of John, a staff member called her 'to pass on a word of encouragement, and to make certain she continued to request the free books or tapes offered'.

She seemed surprised a ministry would want to do this for someone unable to give.

Those who have supported this ministry have not served

Christ in vain.

Objections and Questions here is no shortage of examples of hostility to John

MacArthur's ministry. Some of these arrive in letters to Grace to You. A lady from Utah, after hearing about his book, The Gospel According to Jesus on her car radio, went to the only

Christian bookshop in her area:

The man that manages the bookstore told us he was not carrying the book and he was sure he did not want to order it for us or sell it to us. Then he gave us a long speech why he didn't like MacArthur and why we shouldn't read his books.

Another man told how he had been a Christian for thirty-five years, and how listening to Grace to You was 'an outstanding resource' in his daily Christian life. But when nominated to join the board of elders in his church, an interview with the elders followed and proved a painful experience: I was shocked that for the first thirty minutes they trashed your ministry—as if listening to Grace to You, or reading your books, were the unpardonable sin. The elders are wanting to move toward a seeker-sensitive format.

There are different ways of explaining this kind of reaction to MacArthur's ministry, ranging from misunderstanding and misinformation, to ignorance and plain antipathy to biblical teaching.! I do not mean to address such generalities here, but to take up a few particular questions or objections that have not appeared in the preceding pages.

Some object not so much to the content of his preaching but to the way he says it. A pastor in Brazil complains, "Most of the time MacArthur is rather forceful in his views and lacks cordiality toward those who disagree with him.' By way of reply it has to be agreed that MacArthur is considerably more forceful and direct than is common in contemporary preaching. He believes that if a preacher does not have authority behind what he says he should not be speaking at all in the name of God.

This is the more necessary in a day when plain speaking 1s not 'politically correct and, if some are put off, it is the very thing that many recognize as greatly needed. 'I was astonished at your boldness in preaching the Word', writes a listener 1n Florida. 'It was so refreshing. I rarely am convicted by the teaching at my church.' Others who listen to him regularly understand that, far from being indifferent to their feelings, his directness shows the opposite. A hearer writes: I just want to say thank you for your willingness to tell the truth regardless of how it may make us feel. The hard messages may hurt at the time but in the end lead to life and a true relationship with God. My heart is moved by your concern and evident love for people like me.

Those who understand what MacArthur is teaching can generally interpret the opposition. One correspondent wrote: 'You have proven that a church can grow without a bus ministry. You have proven that folks can get saved without an aggressive altar call. You have proven that the Bible can effectively be taught without the King James Version. It is no wonder that many fanatical fundamentalists don't like you.'

Oljections and Questions 185

Further, while MacArthur does not think a cordial attitude is appropriate towards those who are opponents of the truth, he never demeans such individuals. Probably millions have heard him on 'Larry King Live', one of America's most popular talkshows, when he is the only Christian participant in a group discussion. The manner of his testimony on those occasions has been both definite and humble. In the words of one observer, It is refreshing to see the respect that Larry had for you because you stand for something and don't back down. You also show great respect for others, and that is a marvellous testimony.

Some criticism of John MacArthur comes from men who are thankful for his evangelical leadership while expressing differences. I am thinking of such men as Dr Samuel Waldron, who has opposed MacArthur on a secondary point of doctrine yet can speak of him as 'one of my modern-day heroes. I love John

MacArthur and thank God for his ministry."

It is sometimes complained that John produces young preachers who seek to be replicas. That imitations may exist 1s not to be denied, but that he 'breeds' them is no more true than it was in the case of such men as Spurgeon and Lloyd-Jones.

Numbers of men who loved the preaching at Spurgeon's

Metropolitan Tabernacle themselves went on to build "Tabernacles', not 'churches'; and, more curiously, some admirers of Lloyd-Jones could ease their collar with a finger as accurately as they saw done in the pulpit of Westminster Chapel. But young men need leaders, and if they follow them too closely the fault is one that, with time, hopefully they will unlearn. No 2 Samuel E. Waldron, MacArthur's Millennial Manifesto: A Friendly Response (Owensboro, KY: RBAP, 2008), p. 145. one should be imitated. The command, 'Put not your trust in princes' (Psa. 146:3), rests on a good reason: in MacArthur's words, 'Throughout history God has used imperfect vessels, "that the excellency of the power may be of God and not of us" (2 Cor. 4:7)?

There is no ideal mould or template from which God produces others. No two men have identical gifts and there is imperfection in the best. It may well be that young men, especially graduates of the Master's Seminary, have sought to reproduce Grace Community Church, but it is unreasonable to put the blame at MacArthur's door. He wants a rising generation of preachers who uphold the principles he has taught, where they see them in the Word of God; but he does not want imitative disciples.

'Let every man prove his own work, is the biblical principle (Gal. 6.4). Every man has to honour God in whatever circumstances He appoints. "Do not be called masters', is the abiding command of Christ (Matt. 23:10). whe

Another complaint was put to MacArthur by Victor Ryaguzov when the two men were in conversation in Russia: 'Some suggest that it is your desire to break up existing denominations in foreign countries and form new ones. What is your response to this?' He replied: It's not true. If I had any interest in trying to form a denomination, I would have done it years ago. That's not something anyone would want to undertake after spending more than forty years trying to strengthen as many denominations, associations, and fellowships as possible

Objections and Questions

by helping them prepare leaders for their churches. That is still the approach to ministry I am committed to.

Nor would I ever have any interest in trying to break up existing denominations overseas. In fact, I have been openly critical of American evangelicals who have gone to Russian-speaking parts of the world and started their own churches and para-church ministries rather than making themselves servants to the churches that are already ministering there.

It could be added to this response that neither MacArthur, nor his helpers, give prominence to the work in which they are engaged. Had it been otherwise this would not have been a first published biography. And MacArthur is careful never to give the impression that he is engaged in something uniquely different from the service of many other servants of Christ. As he wrote to supporters of Grace to You (May 15, 2008): Grace to You is far from alone—many other ministries like ours still faithfully open God's Word every day to their audiences, both here in the United States and around the world. Some of the oldest, strongest ministries in Christian radio have been teaching the Bible for generations and are seeing more fruit from their ministries than ever.

Another critical observation sometimes raised has to do with a seemingly uncritical acceptance of a multiplication of musical instruments in public worship. This modern development has, of course, not originated with Grace Community Church or with the students of the Master's Seminary; the fault—if it be a fault—is that no check is offered to the phenomenon that has become so widespread.

In response to this, a distinction has to be made between the general subject of worship and musical instruments in particular. On the general subject MacArthur is by no means silent.

It prompted his book, The Ultimate Priority: Worship, 11 which he identified neglect of God's holiness as a lack that is 'eating at the heart of our worship'. He recognizes that worship 1s no secondary issue: 'I am convinced that the downgrading of worship, Scripture, and theology will ultimately usher in serious doctrinal compromise." It is the lost consciousness of the majesty of God which has turned worship into what appeals to congregations: Perhaps the most visible signs of pragmatism are seen in the convulsive changes that have revolutionized the church worship service in the past decade. Some of evangelicalism's largest and most influential churches now boast Sunday services that are designed purposely to be more rollicking than reverent.*

In a treatment entitled, 'With Hearts and Minds and Voices', he gives a full and balanced survey of Christian praise, past and present, which needs to be much better known. Central to his treatment is the following conviction: There is certainly nothing wrong with the simple, straightforward personal praise that characterizes the best of today's praise choruses. Neither is there anything wrong with the evangelistic and testimonial thrust of yesterday's gospel songs. But it is a profound tragedy that in some circles, only contemporary choruses are sung. Other

Ashamed of the Gospel, p. 44. * Tbid., p. xiii. congregations limit their repertoire to hundred-year-old gospel songs. Meanwhile, a large and rich body of classic Christian hymnody is in danger of being utterly lost out Olsheepnecicct 0.

Like it or not, today's songwriters are teachers, too. Many of the lyrics they are writing will soon be far more deeply and permanently ingrained in the minds of Christians than anything they hear their pastors teach from the pulpit. How many songwriters are skilled enough in theology and Scripture to qualify for such a vital role in the catechesis of our people?

The question is answered by the paucity of expression found in the most popular modern praise chorus—especially when compared to some of the classic hymns. Compare the lyrics of "Shine, Jesus, Shine' with 'O Worship the King, All Glorious Above.' Or compare 'Something

Beautiful' with 'O Sacred Head, Now Wounded'. I chose those examples not because I see anything erroneous or anti-biblical in those particular modern praise choruses, but because they are the best of the genre.®

But turning from the content of praise to musical instruments in particular, John offers little criticism, although he points out a major source of the change that has come about in this area. He quotes the 'prophecy of James Ryle that "God 1s getting ready to anoint Christian musicians with the same anointing that was given to the Beatles.' The same man attributes to God the words, 'T had a purpose, and the purpose was to usher in the charismatic renewal with musical revival around the world." This can pander to the taste of people who 'are often more concerned about 5 John MacArthur, Joni Eareckson Tada, Robert and Bobbie Wolgemuth, O Worship The King (Wheaton, IL, Crossway, 2000), pp. 1-7, 12-13.

Charismatic Chaos, p. 72. whether they like the music than they are about whether they are hearing the truth'."? However, provided the intention 1s not to entertain or promote emotion, whether churches choose to use an orchestra, or a band, is seen by MacArthur as a question of style to be decided by local circumstances and preferences.

The church, it is said, should not impose limitations where Scripture itself allows liberty. And if God approved the use of many instruments in the temple worship, why should we be more restrictive? So while any music employed in worship simply as entertainment is censured, it 1s said 'a music ministry' may have a subordinate place 'if it sees the ministry as a means to strengthen the church family spiritually or extend the reach of the gospel'.

Personally I hope the argument that liberty is permissible, when it comes to the use of musical instruments, is one to which Dr MacArthur may give more attention. I believe the defence of musical instruments rests on the same argument that was used by opponents of the Reformers to defend the continuance of practices prevalent in the Church of Rome—from musical instruments to vestments. The defence was that if the Old Testament sanctioned these, why should they now be put aside? The answer of the Reformers and Puritans was to affirm the great change introduced by the work of Christ and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The temple in old Jerusalem is no longer a model for an age when everywhere there is worship 'in spirit and in truth' (John 4:23), when believers enter into 'the holiest of all, when Levite choirs stand down, and all sing who have 'the word of Christ' and are being 'filled with the Spirit (Eph. 5:18-18; Col. 3:16). The New Testament church knows nothing " Truth War, p. 178.

* Ashamed of the Gospel, p.183.

Olyections and Questions IgI of temple choirs, incense, and musical instruments, because it has no need of them. To bring them back, the Reformers argued, was to take the church back to infancy.

In the Reformed tradition, the use of one musical instrument, simply to set the tune, is a very different thing from introducing a collection of instruments as a part of worship, as in the Temple: a single instrument may belong to adiaphora, or 'things indifferent', no more to be regarded as a part of worship than the pulpit on which the preacher stands.

I entirely agree with MacArthur's statement: 'I believe worship is the church's highest priority.!° But, as the use of instruments is so much involved in the contemporary change taking place in the worship of many churches, I do not think it can be passed over. I might also add that the singing at a communion service at Grace Community Church, without any kind of musical accompaniment, is among the most uplifting I have heard anywhere in the world. whe

Calvin, for example, wrote: 'Instrumental music is not fitter to be adopted into the Public Worship of the Christian Church, than the incense, the candlesticks, and the other shadows of the Mosaic law . . . Instrumental music was only tolerated on account of the times and of the people, because they were as boys. But in Gospel times we must not have recourse to these, unless we wish to destroy the evangelical perfection, and to obscure the meridian light which we enjoy in Christ our Lord' (on J Sam, 18:1-9). This argument was not novel to the sixteenth century; on the contrary, it is found in the early church Fathers and explains why musical instruments in worship were 'not earlier than the eighth, and not in general use till the thirteenth century', Even Thomas Aquinas (c. 1226-74) wrote: "The Church does not use musical instruments to praise God lest she should seem to Judaise.' Quotations from The Organ Question: Statements by Dr Ritchie and Dr Porteous, with Introductory Notice by Robert S. Candlish (Edinburgh: Johnstone and Hunter, 1856), pp. 109-23.

10 Ashamed of the Gospel, p. 188.

A final area where criticism has arisen needs to be touched on. On the subject of Dispensationalism MacArthur has faced opposition from opposite directions. First, from fundamentalist dispensationalists who took The Gospel According to Jesus as an attack on Dispensationalism, as already noted. But criticism has also come from Reformed Christians who, while admiring his ministry as a whole, regard his thinking as defective on this subject. When, for instance, preachers in Brazil were asked to note his influence on their ministries, negative comment on Dispensationalism was sometimes mentioned. 'Negatively', one wrote, 'I believe that he exemplified the possibility (I am not speaking here of consistency) of being soteriologically reformed and dispensational at the same time.' Another reported: John MacArthur's ministry has mostly impacted my life through literature and the academic accomplishments of the Master's College. I became familiar with MacArthur's books during the first years of my ministry in a rural congregation. A couple of books that provided a great pastoral help for my pastoral ministry during those years were Keys to Spiritual Growth and Charismatic Chaos. Later on, the work, The Gospel According to Jesus was very helpful in a personal struggle against prosperity theology, though the book was not written with that topic in view. As I read these books I could observe how MacArthur approached biblical passages in an expository way, and it was a great incentive to do the same (though my greatest influence in this came from D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones). However, as I kept on reading MacArthur's works, I became very disappointed with his dispensational emphasis.!!

'' These comments were acquired and translated for me by Dr Solano Portela whose tribute to John MacArthur I have already quoted above.

Olyections and Questions

Perhaps the explanation why some criticize MacArthur for being no dispensationalist at all, while others say that he emphasizes it too much, lies in differing definitions of the word. If Dispensationalism means all that such authors as Scofield and Chafer have taught, then the preacher at Grace Community

Church is no dispensationalist. But on his own definition of the word, John can say: 'I have not abandoned Dispensationalism, nor do I intend to.'

The difference between MacArthur and what he calls 'traditional Dispensationalism' has to do with his denial of the error which puts Israel 'under law' and the church 'under grace', The Jews were never 'under law' as a means of salvation, but all men are responsible to the unchanging law of God, including Christians, as already considered above.'' Yet the course of future events, as believed by dispensationalists, he also believes— namely, the 'rapture' of the church, the 'coming' of Christ (after a seven-year tribulation) to reign on earth for a thousand years (the millennium) before the last judgment. Although affirming there 1s only one way of salvation for Jew and Gentile, he holds that a major difference continues between the church and Israel in the purposes of God. While Gentile believers were individually elected to salvation, physical Israel is also elected: There are only two people [groups of human beings ] elections in Scripture: Israel, an eschatological group of ethnic

Israelites that will constitute the future nation who will receive the promises of God, and the Church. There's no 2 The differences between the original Scofield Reference Bible and The New Scofield Reference Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 1967), of which Charles Feinberg was one of the editors, are examined by O. Palmer Robertson, The Christ of the Covenants (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980), pp. 201-27.

13 See p. 71 above. reason to mingle the two; or because the Church is elect, therefore, cancel Israel's election. Isaiah 45:4 calls Israel 'My elect'. . . Israel is God's elect.'*

This latter election will be visible to all after 'the rapture', when, it is believed, 144,000 converted Jews will be the means of preparing national Israel for her role during the reign of Christ in the millennium. A summary of this teaching can be found in The MacArthur Study Bible (Nashville; Word, 1997), p. 2197.

Traditional Dispensationalism supported this view of unfulfilled prophecy by asserting that 'the kingdom', promised in the Old Testament, was not established in the New Testament age; fulfilment will only be after the rapture. It was claimed that to take any other view of the Old Testament promises 'made to Israel' 1s to deny the 'litera? language of Scripture. How that was the case in light of the way the New Testament itself interprets the Old is hard to explain, for we learn that the promises of the new covenant are already experienced in the church (Heb. 8:10; 12:28, etc.); 'the tabernacle of David', which God promised to rebuild, is interpreted by the Holy Spirit as referring to the bringing in of Gentile Christians (Acts 15:16). So Christians of Reformed persuasion commonly believe that Jew and Gentile both enter into the same promises, being grafted into the same olive tree. John MacArthur answers this case, not by excluding the church from Old Testament promises of the future kingdom (in the manner of traditional Dispensationalism), but by arguing for a double reference for the promises: they can apply to both church and Israel, only with this qualification, that at present the kingdom 1s 'internal, in the hearts and minds of those who '* Shepherds' Conference Address, 2007, printed in Waldron, MacArthur's Millennial Manifesto, p. 145. belong to Jesus Christ', whereas with the Jews in the millennium it will be a visible, 'divine earthly kingdom'. (See New Testament

Commentary; Matthew 1-7, pp. 56, 381; ibid., 2 Corinthians, p.

98; and note on Jeremiah 31:31-34 in Study Bible).

I do not want to reflect on the latter statement except to say that it seems to throw doubt on whether the correct interpretation of unfulfilled prophecy is simply a case of taking either a 'spiritual or a 'literal view of Scripture. The 'literal' interpretation is not necessarily the true one—a mistake the Jews made in not understanding that 'Elijah' had already come (Matt.

11:14), and that the kingdom of God was 'in the midst' of them (Luke 17:21).

While dispensational convictions are certainly to be found in John MacArthur's books, how far they are prominent is a matter of opinion. In some of his most important books they do not come in at all. While the danger of an increasing apostasy is a very real one for him, he is cautious in offering interpretations of contemporary events as the fulfilment of Scripture, and rejects the kind of sensational teaching on prophecy which has discredited the very subject."

This is not the place for an extended discussion of subjects on which much has been written.'° Certain passages in the book 'S His thought has matured in this area. He would not write now, as he did in the Grace to You letter, April, 1980: "Time is limited. As I study Ezekiel 38, I see Russia in conquering Afghanistan moving into the place of prophetic set up for the return of Jesus Christ.'

'6 From MacArthur's standpoint, much recommended reading can be found through the Index of The Master's Seminary Journal, vols 1-20, available on CD. Included in that source is Richard Mayhue's response to J. H. Gerstner's critique of Dispensationalism (Journal, Spring, 1982). From the Reformed standpoint I would recommend W. J. Grier, The Momentous Event (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1970, often reprinted), and O. TAllis, Prophecy and the Church (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1945). of Daniel, the closing chapters of Ezekiel and Zechariah, the three passages claimed to teach the 'rapture','" verses in Romans

11, and the manner in which the book of Revelation is to be interpreted—all these are relevant for the determination of the issues. That an important difference exists in the understanding of these and other parts of Scripture is not to be denied, and they are a reminder that we are to call no man "Teacher'. At the same time, the words of Palmer Robertson are also important: It should not be forgotten that covenant theologians and dispensationalists stand side by side in affirming the essentials of the Christian faith. Very often these two groups within Christendom stand alone in opposition to the inroads of modernism, neo-evangelicalism, and emotionalism. Covenant theologians and dispensationalists should hold in highest regard the scholarly and evangelical productivity of one another. It may be hoped that continuing interchange may be based on love and respect.!8 ' "The rapture is the subject of three passages in the New Testament (John 14:1-4; 1 Corinthians 15:51-54; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17)- John MacArthur Explains the Book of Revelation (Chicago: Moody, 2007), paca '* The Christ of the Covenants, pp. 201-2.

Ware Changin Scene in the United States

ON do not stand still, and by the last decade of the twentieth century there was much evidence of moral collapse in an increasingly materialistic culture. An age had dawned in which traditional Christian values were being shunned by many in public life. 'What are Christians to do,'

MacArthur asked in 1993, 'when the government allows the wholesale slaughter of babies, exalts homosexuality, and denigrates any kind of moral standard?' Answers to the situation were diverse. Some thought a public relations campaign should be a priority. Others advocated the need for more social action, and the organizing of political pressure with demonstrations and protests. There were not lacking those who thought that psychology or mysticism could aid in reversing the decline in Christian belief.

For John MacArthur such proposals were only adding to the confusion. Not the reformation of culture but the salvation of men and women is the church's mandate. But too many churches lacked a sufficient hold on truth to fulfil such a calling. They lacked the faith to assert that from Scripture we can understand the ebb and flow of life better than all the educators, philosophers, politicians and social pundits combined . . . A look at the trends sweeping today's churches demonstrates just how small a god weve fashioned. How else can we explain the boom in Christian psychology, flashy, Las Vegas-style worship services, and high-tech church growth seminars?

In the midst of change, MacArthur saw no need for faithful churches to change what they were already doing. If any new development was to come to the situation at large 1t would only be by the power of God upon the witness to Christ and His Word. By the 1990s there were signs of a hopeful new development, and on this we must now comment.

T have already noted that Fundamentalism, in which so much of evangelical witness was to be found, had broken into two branches in the 1960s: one belligerent towards any change, and the other (the 'new-evangelicalism' as it was sometimes called) anxious for status and academic respectability. MacArthur never belonged to the latter, and from the time of the Lordship controversy he had also parted from many in traditional fundamentalist circles. While some would have still identified him with Fundamentalism in the 1980s, the publication of The Gospel According to Jesus in 1988 made a division plain. As a consequence of this parting, he might have been left an individual, semi-isolated in a sphere of his own, had there not been a stirring that would take numbers of Christians in a new direction.

By the 1990s there were congregations, small and large, across the United States, which were hearing preaching that forty years earlier would have been hard to find. The message sounded

The Changing Scene in the United States

akin to the doctrines of the Reformation and Puritan periods, but it had sprung afresh from Scripture, from the literature of those earlier periods, and was gaining surprising support from the younger generation.!

To call this development a 'movement' would be to misconceive it, at least in the normal use of that term. It had no particular starting point, knew no party planners, and made no public claims. Rather streams of influence had risen quietly in different places, under different men, and in different denominations, yet flowing spontaneously in the same direction. In so far as there were leaders, they were usually conspicuous as preachers, not academics, for the influence was coming from pulpits, from men who believed it was the preaching of the Word of God that always brought fresh life to the churches.

The powerful ally for these men was surprising. It was the evangelical authors of an older school, long unsought and unread, but now in print again and in many hands. In the 1950s

Dr Wilbur Smith commented on the absence of the titles of Jonathan Edwards and other Puritans from all book lists. In the 1990s Edwards was not only widely available again but being read by thousands. Other authors in the same tradition—John Owen at their head—came back as though from the dead. The few contemporary writers who also contributed to this change have, for the most part, already been named in these pages.

' The resurgence of doctrinal Christianity appears to have begun quietly through books in the 1960s. George Dollar wrote in 1973; 'In the last ten years a new threat has emerged within Fundamentalism itself. This has been the militant and rigid Calvinism, usually expressed in its Five Points .. . a growing number within Baptist circles have read the English Puritans and followed Spurgeon in the persuasion that sovereign grace demands the acceptance of all of the Five Points.' History of Fundamentalism, p. 276. Numbers of the readers of the Puritans in the 1960s and '70s had become preachers of influence by the 1990s.

Books alone cannot bring change unless there is spiritual hunger to read them, and by the 1990s there was such hunger.

Dr J. I. Packer's treatment of the attributes of God had reached a comparatively small circle when first published in England in the Evangelical Magazine (c. 1960); but, after being re-issued in book form in the United States in the 1970s under the title Knowing God, sales were to soar to approximately three million by 2005.

Only the existence of this same hunger can explain the growth and multiplication of conferences of a new kind across the United States. At these the speakers no longer majored on such themes as 'How to be Contemporary', or 'How to Build a Successful Church', but on doctrinal teaching and the exposition of Scripture. A renewed reading of history and biography was also showing how doctrinal beliefs had formerly changed the history of the English-speaking peoples. When MacArthur first held a Shepherds' Conference for pastors in 1980, the original chapel building in Sun Valley was large enough to hold the few hundred who attended; and there were few other conferences like it. But in the next twenty years such conferences multiplied across the land; they included the Philadelphia Conference, the Bethlehem Conference (at Minneapolis), the Bolton Conference in New England, the Ligonier Conference in Florida, to name only a few. Even in the Deep South, where in the Southern

Baptist Convention it had been axiomatic that 'Calvinism' and evangelism could not live together, a Founders Conference was inaugurated to point the denomination back to its roots. By the end of the century Tom Ascol, editor of the Founders Journal, could speak of 'the extent to which the revival of the doctrines of grace 1s sweeping across the churches of our land".

Although not belonging to the same denominations, the leaders of these conferences were drawn together by shared convictions. James Montgomery Boice, organizer of the Philadelphia Conference, was one of MacArthutr's earliest friends from the Reformed side. He lectured at Talbot Seminary in 1979, and he preached at the Thirtieth Anniversary of MacArthur's ministry in 1999, before succumbing to an aggressive cancer the following year. Prior to Boice and Packer writing Forewords to The Gospel According to Jesus (1988), MacArthur has said, 'I wasn't moving in Reformed circles.' A close friendship began with R. C. Sproul when John spoke at the Ligonier Conference in 1992; it was to be the first of many such visits to Orlando, Florida. Similarly MacArthur was in Minneapolis with John

Piper in 1997. In turn, Sproul and Piper came to speak at Grace

Community Church.

A shared faith in the sovereignty of God also brought

MacArthur among a new generation of Calvinistic men in Southern Baptist circles. One of these was Mark Dever, pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church, Washington DC, and another was Albert Mohler, President of The Southern Baptist Theological

Seminary, at Louisville, Kentucky. When an editor of Christianity Today visited the bookstore of that Seminary the first books he saw were not those authored within that denomination: 'Right away I noticed a prominent display of John MacArthur's commentaries. The noted Calvinist expositor does not belong fob aie

? Collin Hansen, Young, Restless, Reformed, A Journalist's Journey with the New Calvinists (Wheaton: Crossway, 2008), p. 69.

That MacArthur's ministry was very much a part of the resurgence of Reformed belief was not at first understood by all who listened to him. At the Shepherds' Conference in 1997 some of the 3,000 men present were a little surprised at things they heard. Particularly was this the case in a session at which questions were put to MacArthur without prior notification.

They came freely from the floor, and the first was, 'John, you spend a lot of time with guys in the Reformers' camp, what are some of the things that attract you to them, and what are some of the differences?'

The reader of these pages is already familiar with part of the response, but we give the whole now in John's own words: There are a number of ways to answer that question. I have always since my days as a Seminary student been committed to Reformed soteriology.* People say, 'When did you become Reformed?' Well, I don't know that that is anything very recent. In my days as a student in College I was a typical football-type player, and I never let my books get in the way of my education, and just kind of went through the motions. But I always had this voracious appetite for Scripture, even as a young person. I remember at fourteen wanting to understand the deep things of God, and reading things like Thomas 4 Kempis, and all the books by E. M. Bounds. But I didn't really know where to go with it all; I just had this desire to know the Word of God. Even then I also read some missionary biographies which had a profound effect on me. So I was attracted to serious things with regard to the Word of God, even though I wasn't particularly serious in my personality. I was always frustrated by not understanding the Scriptures. People would say to me, 'You should read the Bible every day, take

2 Soteriology: the doctrine of salvation. fifteen minutes.' I would read it and not understand what it meant, and have to go and try and find out—asking my father or someone.

When I got into Seminary we had some extra reading to do, and our theology professor, Dr Bob Saucy channelled me towards the Princeton people—B. B. Warfield, Machen, and others. I began to read them, and found a depth of understanding of the Word of God, a depth of dealing with doctrinal issues. It was not inconsistent with what I had believed in the past, but was much more refined and deeper. So in Seminary I began to read more.

I came across a book by Stephen Charnock called The Existence and Attributes of God. I was absolutely blown away by the fact that that guy could say so much about the existence and attributes of God. It's the kind of book you read all your life; you have to take it in small doses because it 1s so loaded. That appealed to me because I wanted to understand the Scripture in depth. Then I began to read Thomas Watson's Body of Divinity. I read it and read it and marked it up, when I was still a Seminary student, sorting through lots of things. I was drawn to people who had thought so deeply about the Word: of God and that drew me to Reformed theology. It wasn't so many years after that that I got a whole set of Thomas

Manton's writings. So the attraction for me to Reformed theology is not because of the system; it is because of the people, the way they dealt with the Word of God with such accuracy, and the way they were able to pull out of 1t such clarity of doctrine. P've never been much of a systematizer as such. I have always been committed to the fact that theology should be exegetical; and I really do believe that Reformed theology, at its heart was exegetical. When you get Calvin's Commentaries you begin to realize that the greatest of John Calvin is not his Institutes, the greatest is in his Commentaries, because I want to know how he treated the various passages of Scripture.

I haven't really changed but through the years my understanding of the great themes of the doctrines of grace, or Reformed theology, has been greatly refined, and it's been refined because I have been twenty-eight years expounding the Scriptures, and finding that such great theology stood the test of the text.*

MacArthur went on to speak briefly on elements in Reformed theology relating to eschatology and ecclesiology which he did not believe. He remains resolute in his conviction on baptism for believers only.°

The next question was this: 'In our local newspaper they were talking about the changing face of religion in America; and included something from a George Barna report which said, in the twenty-first century the church will increasingly become a cyber church, and there will be less and less of believers gathered together in local fellowships. I would like to get your reaction to that information.'

In reply MacArthur emphasized the seriousness of the mistake made when we allow our culture to dictate our practice—buying into cultural formulas for ministry may take you where you

Phil Johnson has pointed to one area where MacArthur's thinking was 'refined' in the 1990s: while the latter had always held the substitutionary nature of the atonement, Johnson believes its relationship to justification now came into sharper focus, "He began to stress that truth regularly and expound it more thoroughly than ever before'. Truth Endures, p. 215. If Christ justifies all for whom He died, then the atonement cannot have been universal in its design. There was also, I believe, a fuller understanding of the nature of assurance in MacArthur's chapter contributed to Assured by God (2006), where he shows that a profound sense of one's sinfulness is not incompatible with true assurance, and that repentance is to be lifelong.

His address, 'Baptism: The Case for Believers' Baptism', is available from Ligonier Ministries. don't mean to go'. He instanced the effects of such ideas as those of David Watson who thought that by concentrating on the spoken word the churches were becoming irrelevant, and believed that a drama group could be more effective. This issue led MacArthur back to the previous question: There's no question that, in the future, the culturally orientated and defined church will take on the forms that the culture dictates, and it will drift off into who knows what. Here is one of the reasons why Reformed theology is booming the way it is, and it is booming. I remember that as a Seminary student I knew only one little Calvinistic church of about thirty people. But as evangelical Christianity has abandoned sound doctrine, in response there is a backlash among people who are saying, 'We cannot take this amorphous approach; we are tired of the most atheological kind of evangelical telling us where the bottom line 1s.' That is basically what has happened. The 'experientialists', mostly charismatics and others as well, have determined that what is most important is that they get into mainstream acceptance, no matter how aberrant they might be; and evangelicalism thinks she needs to embrace them, accept them, not fight and be divisive. The result 1s an acceptance of the 'irreducible minimum', in which all are to be embraced, and any other theology 1s held to be 'divisive' and so forth. In that kind of amorphous, a-theological environment, people who have a real love for the Word of God are looking for somewhere to go to get some answers, and to get some substance and content, some biblical interpretation and theology on which to anchor

'Most churches rely heavily on the spoken or written word for communication, and then wonder why so few people find the Christian faith to be relevant. The truth is we live in a world that is almost dominated by drama.' David Watson, I believe in the Church (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1982)p22218 their lives in the shifting sand. As this 'experiential' [feeling-centred] movement gets larger and larger, I believe the swing back towards Reformed theology is going to grow and grow. The movement is rapidly growing; even the Southern Baptists are trying to return to their roots in Reformed theology, as well as other groups.

And there is the development of books on Reformed theology. Much of what I write is Reformed theology basically. The book that I wrote, The Gospel According to Jesus, was basically Reformed theology, a statement on soteriology, and Faith Works was even more definitive as a statement on that.' I don't think people read it as that because I don't quote the Westminster Confesston—I try to stick with the Scripture. But there is definitely a swing back, and we can hope and pray. It is still God-gifted men, preaching the Word of God expositionally and doctrinally, that is God's plan to bring in the redeemed and build the church.

Subdued silence followed this answer, to be interrupted by one or two individuals who could not refrain from clapping.

'Thank you both', MacArthur said dryly, and then, with broadening smile, 'Maybe I will say something that you will all like later in the week!' There were certainly many present who were thankful for what they had heard.

John MacArthur (as Martyn Lloyd-Jones) does not wave the labels 'Calvinist? or 'Reformed'. He wants people to be convinced by Scripture itself, not by any other authorities: I normally prefer to avoid using the term Calvinism because it often provokes too much emotion and too many

7 Ina Grace to You letter of July 16, 2008, he observed: 'The Gospel Accordimg to Jesus has helped define the ministry of Grace to You . . . In most of the places around the world where we minister God's truth, that book was the instrument the Lord used to open the doors of ministry for us.' misconceptions to be useful if the goal is real understanding rather than merely vigorous debate.'

Instead he usually uses the term 'the doctrines of grace'. But sometimes the better-known term is unavoidable, as when in 2008 Grace to You entitled his two-part series on these doctrines, "Hot Button Questions on Calvinism'. After endorsing a reprint of The Five Points of Calvinism in 2004, he was careful to add, 'I believe them, not because of their historical pedigree, but because that is what Scripture teaches.' In the same book he repeated what he had said in 1997: "The Spirit of God is moving the church to re-establish the glorious high ground of sovereign grace in salvation." It was a conviction shared by his friends. In October 2003, when Mark Dever asked R. C. Sproul to name 'the things you most appreciate about the current scene in American evangelicalism', the Presbyterian preacher replied, "The recovery of interest in Puritanism, the recovery of concern for reformational theology.'

The ministry at Sun Valley had joined with a wider awakening to doctrinal Christianity. Far from being isolated, MacArthur's preaching and books were clearly an important part of a larger momentum and regrouping. By the first decade of the present century this turn round in belief was conspicuous enough to come to the notice of the secular press, first in Time magazine, and then in other journals read nationwide. It also became the 8D. T. Steele, C. I. Thomas, S. Lance Quinn, The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, and Documented (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R, 2004), p. 140.

Said at 2007 Shepherds' Conference. subject of a first book when Collin Hansen wrote, Young, Restless, Reformed: A Journalist's Journey with the New Calvinists (Wheaton: Crossway, 2008). Hansen, editor-at-large for Christianity

Today, was enthusiastic about how the Calvinistic resurgence had begun to 'reclaim and reform evangelicalism'. He believed: 'Though today's Calvinists remain outnumbered, their influence leavens the evangelical movement . . . The growth of the Reformed ranks, especially among youth, portends significant changes ahead."!? On the Southern Baptist scene, he quotes the words of Tom Ascol, 'The International Mission Board is flooded with Calvinists.'

Hansen's book gave particular significance to the first "Together for the Gospel' conference that took place in April

2006, as marking a new unity:

Good friends Dever, Mahaney, Ligon Duncan, and Al Mohler, invited three of their heroes—Piper, John MacArthur, and R. C. Sproul—to join them in addressing a crowd of about three thousand pastors in Louisville, Kentucky . . . The four middle-aged Together for the Gospel hosts watched their heroes, each older than sixty, address a crowd mostly in their twenties and thirties.!!

From all this it might be assumed that John MacArthur sees in the recovery of doctrinal Christianity the prospect of a major advance in progress. Certainly the 'booming' of Reformed theology, which he noted in 1997, has continued; and the extent of the demand for his own books and radio ministry is part of the evidence. But his thankfulness is mixed with a measure of '° Young, Restless, Reformed, pp. 113-14. While Hansen surveys leaders in some of the larger churches, it is his belief that 'the backbone of the Reformed resurgence comprises ordinary churches' (p. 158).

pe LOZ, concern. It was reflected in his declining to be interviewed for Hansen's book."

I can think of reasons for that concern. For one thing, it is premature to be confident the advance will continue. As MacArthur surveyed the first decade of the present century he knew that all was by no means bright. If ground was being won in some areas, it was still being lost in others. He noted how, to gain larger audiences, Bible teaching on radio in the United

States was losing air time to 'Christian music and live talk'. A similar compromise was 'at epidemic levels among Christian publishers'. There was no end of controversy in sight. He commented in 2008: When I came out of Seminary I really did not expect to fight the battles I have fought. I never thought I would spend most of my life on the broader evangelical front defending the gospel and sound doctrine.

Instead of being excited at the new interest that journalists were showing in Calvinism and the Puritans, MacArthur remembers how 'promotiom of the gospel by the secular press had proved a dangerous thing in the past.'* The kind of thing that gains the attention of the world, especially excitement over numbers and personalities, are of small consequence in the kingdom of God. 'If a thing is successful, it must be true', is a maxim that has done much harm among evangelicals and he

Noted by Hansen, ibid., p. 145. In an article, "The Calvinistic Resurgance in America', Erroll Hulse wrote: 'In the next edition Collin Hansen should seek again an interview with John MacArthur Jr. The ministries led by MacArthur represent a large proportion of the Calvinistic Resurgence.' Reformation Today, Nov.-Dec. 2008, p. 39.

13 When the newspaper owner, William R. Hearst, gave orders to promote Billy Graham in Time, Life, and Newsweek in 1949, the results were by no means all beneficial. does not want to see it continued. History shows clearly enough that truth is often with the remnant.

Further, while Hansen correctly says 'the backbone of the Reformed resurgence comprises ordinary churches', that is obscured by his heavy concentration on those whom he considers to be the leaders. The book looks at things far too largely on the human level, and leaves the impression of a movement of 'New Calvinists', promoted by mass meetings and celebrity preachers. But this kind of treatment is misleading.'* A survey of the "Hansen type' looks like something already familiar instead of something new, for evangelicalism has far too often indulged in the following of personalities. If this is indeed a recovery of Reformation belief, the Hansen presentation is out of harmony with the influence of the man who would not so much as have his name put on his grave in Geneva. Genuine Reformed faith teaches Christians to sing,

The glory Lord, from first to last,

Is Thine, is Thine alone.

Every genuine work of God is incapable of being adequately explained on the human level. There is mystery in it. Truth 'springs from the earth' independently of what may be happening elsewhere. In so far as a new unity has come into being today—as we believe it has—it has not come from meetings or organizations. A true revival of God-centred Christianity has '* Tt gives some grounds for Darryl Hart to criticize 'Hansen's description of this odd collection of Baptists, charismatics, and emergents as Calvinists'.

Review entitled, 'Young Calvinism without an Edge', Ordained Servant, vol. 18, 2009 (Committee of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church), p. 150. MacArthur certainly does not think that all who are now being called "New Calvinists' are sharers in a common purpose. He is openly critical of Mark Driscoll, whom Hansen treats as a leader, and certainly does not believe that Reformed and Puritan belief will lead men in the charismatic direction.

The Changing Scene in the United States Dia always had with it the biblical caution not to be called masters, and to cease from man. While recommending Hansen's survey, Don Carson had good reason to add: This is not the time for Reformed trrumphalism. It is the time for quiet gratitude to God and earnest intercessory prayer, with tears, that what has begun well will flourish beyond all human expectation.'®

In the present writer's opinion, a lesson from nineteenth-century German church history is relevant for us. Daniel Edward has written of how hope of a lasting evangelical revival in Prussia failed. "The ten or fifteen years before 1848 spread out in bright sunshine in the remembrance of all Christians.' A galaxy of eminent teachers and preachers appeared to be turning the tide. 'They saw', Edward wrote, the excellence of the gospel as the divine scheme of redemption; they were strong for Christ as the only Saviour, but they rejected the law as the schoolmaster that leads to Christ. They set forth eloquently the privileges of the gospel to a people . . . who needed first of all to hear the voice, 'Repent'. . . These good men failed for want of what our forefathers styled 'law work'. They wanted a deeper knowledge of God's holy law, and a deeper knowledge of sin as the transgression of it.'©

That lesson remains a warning for today. In the current recovery of Calvinistic thinking there is need for greater fear of God, of His majesty and holiness. Such features have ever accompanied a powerful work of the Spirit of God, and they

15 Words included in endorsements on the book. 16°The Course of the Church in Prussia during the present Century', British and Foreign Evangelical Review, vol. xxiv (London: Nisbet, 1875), pp. 700- are connected with the revelation of His character as Lawgiver.

There is not yet the evidence of such conviction of sin as has marked all the spiritual awakenings of history. For too long, in MacArthur's words, evangelical circles have been better at merriment than mourning. This is no argument against joy and song, but where the presence of God is felt there is also godly fear. When the Spirit of God is poured out men have better understood the text: "The Lord is in His holy temple: let all the earth keep silence before Him' (Hab. 2:20).

A Visit to Grace Community Church

W ell before eight o'clock on Roscoe Boulevard in Sun

Valley, cars began to turn into the car park at Grace Community Church. It was a Sunday morning early in 2010 and we were glad to be there again. At 8 am a meeting of some twenty elders began in a room adjacent to the main auditorium, with John MacArthur present. After a few minutes of conversation, all fell to their knees and the best part of half an hour was given to prayer. On this particular morning, a church member was introduced briefly by an elder. This Christian woman had been unwell and questioned whether the toleration of bitterness in her heart had brought chastisement from God. Prayer was made particularly and tenderly for her recovery.

At 8.30 morning worship began promptly, led by Clayton

Erb, Minister of Music. By that hour the main auditor1um was comfortably filled, although hundreds of the members were elsewhere. Simultaneously with the first service, seven Fellowship meetings were taking place in various parts of the spacious premises. They meet under the care of eight pastors (elders of the church); although not called such, these meetings almost amount to churches. Two of them are designated for 'All Ages'; one for 'Young Marrieds and Families', another for 'Junior High' (Grades 7-8); two are held in Spanish; and one is for the Mentally Disabled. The subjects being taken that morning in these Fellowships included: Studies in Characters; Sin's Genesis James 1:13-18; 1 John; and 1 Timothy. Two Sunday schools also run concurrently, one of them for the Deaf.

After a short intermission, those attending these Fellowships moved to the main auditortum where the morning service 1s repeated at 10:30 am, while another seven Fellowships convene under different leaders, along with another Children's Sunday

School. The number in attendance at both main services is commonly about the same. With the total of people on the premises approaching 6,000, there is no possibility of all being able to be present in the main auditorium at the same time.

The Fellowships are the key to understanding how members of Grace Church are all individually known and cared for. The elders/pastors are not simply responsible for the Sunday meetings of their group, but exercise an on-going care for all who attend. A register of names is kept every week. The Fellowship at which I was present, has about four hundred regular members,! and an information sheet was given to all present relating to matters for prayer, the care of the home-bound, and the nine Home Bible studies meeting in different locations.

At the main service every person was welcomed at the door and given an attractive ten-page news sheet. It contained ' The largest of the Fellowships runs to some eight hundred members, but the majority are closer to about two hundred.

A Vistt to Grace Community Church BES information on the services of the day, information on various meetings, book notices, and missionary news. The Conover family, Bob, Margie, and their children, were home after twenty-one years service in the Muslim world—Morocco and Jordan. Bart

Horton wrote of a team of eight adults, and their children, about to leave Grace for work in Lebanon. The church currently sends and supports more than sixty missionary families, located on six continents. They are all under the oversight of Grace elders, and receive periodic visits. On this particular Sunday, I learned that one elder was absent in India, another was about to go to the United Kingdom, and a third to Russia.

Perhaps about half of the elders/pastors are full-time staff; and, seeing how the church is administered, one can understand this necessity. But much work 1s also undertaken by volunteers, both on Sundays and on weekdays. The early tradition of personal evangelism has been on-going; there are groups that minister in jails and detention centres, and fifty or more serve weekly at Grace to You. In one year John noted that 4,632 hours of labour had been given by such helpers. Among those helping on Sundays are John and Patricia MacArthur's now grown-up children: Matthew MacArthur teaches a sixteen-week repeated course on 'Fundamentals of the Faith'; his younger brother

Mark leads a Bible Study in a Fellowship group. Their sister

Marcy helps, among many services, in the Mentally Disabled

Fellowship, and Melinda gives time to her very young children while aiding in the children's division of the work. These four are the parents of MacArthur's fifteen grandchildren, who are all in the church as well.

The evening service was held at 6 pm, again preceded by an elders' prayer meeting, where the number is only slightly less than in the morning. MacArthur has long called for believers to be at the worship services twice on Sundays. The auditorium was again comfortably filled, although the worshippers knew that MacArthur was recovering from a strained back and would not be preaching then as he normally does. In his place that night was an Associate Pastor who preached a telling and convicting sermon on 'Pride and Prejudice' from James 2. With far less instrumental accompaniment than in the morning services, it seemed to me the congregational singing was better in the evening. Frequently there are also baptisms during the evening service. There was none on this particular Sunday, but John has a comment on the importance of the ordinance which I will insert here. It arose out of a particular Sunday when a young mother gave her testimony at her baptism. She had come to conviction and to Christ after a car crash in which both her husband and her youngest child were killed: She entered our baptism pool, told of her conversion, and spoke of a loving God who is no longer a stranger. While not all our weekly baptism testimonies are so dramatic, they do have one thing in common: God's unique, custom-tailored process of bringing sinners to Himself is always clearly articulated and given a wide audience. Each of us in attendance hears first-hand the tender themes of salvation spoken from the heart of saints of every race, age, and religious background. We hear of conviction, repentance, and transformation where sin, rebellion, pain, and dissatisfaction once reigned. The once blind and dead speak of light and life. Those previously at war with God, and with no desire to know Him, humbly bow before Jesus as Lord, recognizing the unfathomable reality of sins pardoned, and the freedom, joy, and peace that comes with new life.

A Visit to Grace Community Church 27, On the Sunday about which I have been speaking, MacArthur preached in the morning on 'The Power and Pity of Christ' from Mark 5:21-43. The course of his morning preaching had been determined way back in 1981, following the meeting with Moody Press in Chicago when they had asked for a series of New Testament commentaries. After much prayer and reflection he had agreed, believing that 'if the commentaries were well done, they could ultimately be more enduring than any other aspect of his ministry'. Plans were then settled for a project that would take ten years and be the largest ever undertaken by Moody Press. The time scale proved to be wrong, for the work was to be greater than anyone imagined in 1981. First

John took longer in preaching through the New Testament books than had been anticipated. The Gospel of Matthew, for instance, needed 226 sermons. Then there was the arduous business of transferring the spoken word from recordings into written form. The process sounds straightforward; in reality the difficulty involved is one that has often prevented preachers becoming authors, speaking and writing being two very different media. While Moody's editors undertook the initial work, and put the sermons into chapters, it all had to come back to John, several chapters at a time, with the expectation that they would be returned within a month. There might then be a 'free' period until another lot arrived. He developed the habit of carrying the commentary manuscripts about with him to use spare moments on them. A note to Jerry Jenkins—Moody's initiator of the series—gives some insight into this process, as well as MacArthur's own estimate of its significance. He wrote to Jenkins on June 9, 2005: You set in motion the history of my life! At least, in large part. Would you believe I have had to do two commentary chapters a week since the series started? At least the Study Bible was done in three intense years, and I can give further work on that to translators. The bottom line, I keep telling

Patricia, is that the New Testament Commentary series 1s my most important contribution by far—so thanks!

Noting the work involved in the commentary series, Phil

Johnson has recorded: 'Sometimes John goes through a chapter twice or more (if he heavily revises). So he actually edits at a rate of about two or more a week, though he might get as much as three weeks rest between chapter lots.'

The MacArthur New Testament Commentary thus went forward slowly. The first ten years saw Hebrews (1983), 1 Corinthians (1984), Ephesians (1986), Galatians (1987) and four volumes of Matthew (1985-89). By December 2009, 791 chapters had been edited and published in twenty-eight volumes of the New Testament Commentary. Yet even this was not the whole. One more Gospel remained to be completed, namely, the series on Mark, with which the preacher was engaged on the occasion of the visit of which I have been speaking. The long-term result of the 1981 decision has thus kept MacArthur preaching through the New Testament. wie

Discussion of the commentary series is a suitable point at which to pause and introduce the assessment of MacArthur's preaching on Matthew given in the latest volume of Dr Hughes

Oliphant Old's significant series, The Reading and Preaching of

A Visit to Grace Community Church

the Scriptures in the Worship of the Christian Church. The reader of Old's words—which I will abbreviate—will understand that their value is limited by the short selection of sermons on which they are based. A fuller hearing or reading of the preacher would have given rise to a revision of some statements. Dr Old's theological standpoint is probably closer to contemporary Princeton than to that of Sun Valley, but if that is the case there is an added value to his assessment: To get a feel for the way MacArthur handles the ministry of the Word, I ordered his ten sermons on the eighth and ninth chapters of the Gospel of Matthew. The preacher has to deal with some tough questions in these two chapters. I was curious how someone with a reputation for solid expository preaching, such as MacArthur has, might interpret these passages. Listening to these sermons was a rewarding experience, even if I have a number of reservations and hesitations about MacArthur's approach to preaching.

These miracles [in Matthew 8-9] were performed in Galilee, and our preacher takes the time thoroughly to set the geographical scene, giving us a vivid picture of the countryside. Many of these nine miracle stories are healing stories, and our preacher has collected an impressive amount of material not only about the diseases mentioned but also about how they were understood and treated in ancient times. Sometimes all this material is a bit ponderous, and he tells us more than we really want to know, but more often it makes for a fascinating sermon.

In the way of human-interest stories one finds, on the other hand, very little. The illustrative material focuses on the biblical story. It is the passage of Scripture that is illuminated rather than a principle drawn out of the passage. MacArthur has an amazing ability to explain

Scripture by Scripture. Particularly Uluminating is the way MacArthur emphasizes the similarity between Matthew and John on the one hand and Matthew and Paul on the other. He does not overburden the sermon with material that only the more initiated members of his congregation can follow, but for the more serious listener these parallel passages make the sermon richly informative and mightily convincing.

Realizing that a significant school of modern biblical scholarship has denied that Paul's elaborate theology was based on the simple gospel of Jesus, our preacher 1s careful to show the similarity between the two. It is very interesting to note that the polemic implied does not come to the surface. MacArthur simply shows how Paul preaches the same gospel as Matthew. One gets the impression that MacArthur is first of all an expositor and only after that a polemicist. This speaks enormously to his credit.

Having said this, however, one has to admit that our preacher has a very clear line of interpretation on these miracle stories in Matthew 8 and 9. As he sees it, these miracles are above all the proofs of Christ's divinity. They are not examples of what the power of faith can do. Much less are they the myths that symbolically express the devotion of the early Christians to their extraordinary teacher. One never gets the impression that this preacher has the least shadow of doubt but that these miracles took place exactly as they are recorded. Defending the accuracy of the Bible seems to interest MacArthur not at all. This basic assumption that the text of Scripture is reliable is part of the foundation of his effectiveness as an interpreter.

For the last couple of generations the idea that one should make the major theme of these two chapters that the miracles proved the divinity of Jesus was about the last thought an enlightened preacher would try to make. That, however, is just the point MacArthur does make. He makes the point very successfully. He shows from the structure of the text itself that this is what Matthew is trying to say. He supports it with parallel texts from both the Synoptic Gospels and the Johannine literature. What is surprising is that there is no vitriolic attack on the 'higher critics' or the 'modernists'.

The one direction in which MacArthur does let loose a moderate amount of polemic is toward the charismatics and faith healers. Charismatics take a very different tack in interpreting the healings and exorcisms of the Gospels. Unlike the dispensationalists, who say the miracles of New Testament times have a place in that dispensation but not in our dispensation, the charismatics see miracles as an ordinance of the church. Like the sacraments, they should be a continuing part of the Christian church's ministry. When MacArthur argues that the purpose of the miracles was to make it clear that Jesus was the Christ, he means we should not therefore expect this kind of healing ministry in the church today. It had its function in New Testament times but, since we have the inspired witness of Scripture today that is sufficient witness to establish both the true divinity and the true humanity of Christ, miracles are no longer necessary.

What is more than clear to me after listening to these sermons, is that those who can take the text the way it is, seem to make a lot more sense of it than those who are always trying to second-guess it. Surely one of the greatest strengths of MacArthur's preaching ministry 1s his complete confidence in the text.

Let us look for a brief moment at our preacher as an orator. One could evaluate his oratory very differently. My first impression is that he has little to offer from the standpoint of oratory. Listening to the tapes one has to say that he is the antithesis of Lloyd Ogilvie. Thinking about it a bit longer, however, I have to admit he does have techniques of getting people to listen that we should not overlook . . . He seems to have a feel for the use of rhythm in his preaching. Sometimes his rhythms are rapid and sometimes very slow. These pulpit rhythms, which we think of as being hopelessly old-fashioned . . . somehow make it possible for the listener to absorb and retain quite a bit of material over a long period of time. MacArthur's rhetoric is terribly out of date, but maybe he knows something the rest of us don't.

Why do so many people listen to MacArthur, this product of all the wrong schools? How can he pack out a church on Sunday morning in an age in which church attendance has seriously lagged. Here is a preacher who has nothing in the way of a winning personality, good looks, or charm. What he seems to have is a witness to true authority. He recognizes in Scripture the Word of God, and when he preaches, it is Scripture that one hears. It is not that the words of John MacArthur are so interesting as it is that the Word of God is of surpassing interest. That is why one listens.?

Had Old met MacArthur he would have had to revise one statement in the last paragraph! He has missed the point that the preacher at Grace Community Church deliberately seeks to keep a projection of his own personality out of the message. wie " Hughes Oliphant Old, The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Christian Church, vol. 7, Our Own Time (Grand Rapid: Eerdmans, 2010).

↑ Back to top