Comments on: An Emerging Critique Worth Reading

By: Michael Spencer

Michael Spencer — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 02:07:47 +0000

I meant that DR. MACARTHUR mentions only two source books.

By: jfred

jfred — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 01:49:53 +0000

Michael–

Actually I mention four of MacArthur’s books and I would add “Hard To Believe” to that list. The point is that all of these titles were written in response to what MacArthur condemns as dangerous trends, if not heresies in the church and are representative of his bestselling books.

Until recently I was a big fan of both MacArthur and Sproul (even subscribed to Tabletalk)but I began to notice the conversations I was having with like-minded devotees was characterized by smug self-satisfaction and little concern to follow Jesus’ command to love our neighbor. Any expressions of ecumenism around MacArthur and Sproul’s followers are laughed at. The funny thing is they don’t realize how laughable they become. Take a look at this post from Challies.com from someone live-reporting from the Ligonier conference in Orlando:

“We are sitting here inside the auditorium at First Baptist Orlando.Wow, this place is huge. This initial meeting is just about getting ready to start. Dr. Sproul and Mel Duncan (Ligon’s brother) are standing up at the front talking as R.C. get s ready to take the stage. He looks really good, by the way.”

This is Christian groupie-idol-worship gone mad! And they think that the guys on TBN are wacked!

By: Michael Spencer

Michael Spencer — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 01:01:04 +0000

With due respect to Dr. Mac…he mentions two books as sources, and neither are well-known or representative.

By: jkeay

jkeay — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 00:50:00 +0000

Re: jfred’s comments;

Amen. And again I say, Amen. You took the words right out of my mouth.

BTW, the show is on the road, including the premillenial dispensationalism:

http://www.tms.edu/audio.asp?ministry_id=3&dlyear=-1&dlcat=Faculty+Lecture+Series&dlcat2=-1

It’s all there, and more.

By: jfred

jfred — Thu, 09 Mar 2006 20:27:57 +0000

I’ve grown weary of Phil Johnson and John MacArthur’s self righteous condemnation of other Christians. They should conduct some self examination on why their Sheperds Conference apparently didn’t feature any speakers who addressed helping the poor or exhorting pastors to a sense of urgency in making their congregations aware of the persecuted church. It seems to me that MacArthur is more interested in writing books to correct heresies (Gospel According to Jesus, Charismatic Chaos, Our Sufficiency In Christ, Reckless Faith) and Johnson would rather devote more energy to his website where he has the nerve to categorize the websites of other ministries according to Johnson’s standard of purity. They pride themselves on being Biblical and are the first to point the finger when they detect others have strayed. According to the ESV Comprehensive Concordance, “justice” is mentioned 135 times. How many times was it heard at the Shepherds Conference? “Justification” and “Justified” are only mentioned 34 times in scripture. Obviously doing “justice” has a strong Biblical mandate, but why aren’t MacArthur and Johnson (and Sproul for that matter) speaking out about it? “The Lord saw it, and it displeased him that there was no justice. He saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no one to intercede.” (Isaiah 59:15-16) I’ve already been accused of selling out to the social gospel on Challies.com and raised the ire of MacArthur’s followers who are stunned that someone would dare question them on just how Biblical they truly are. And for a group that never hesitates to blast others, they are about as thin-skinned as it gets. Before they get too prickly, they should consider this quote from MacArthur in “Reckless Faith” Catholics have “abandoned the true faith for ‘another gospel.’ Catholics and Eastern Orthodox “are not entitled to be embraced as members of Christ’s body.” I’m afraid quotes like that reveal the true heart of MacArthur, Johnson and all their adoring sycophants. Perhaps when they take their show on the road they can explain their stubborn adherence to the theological fiction of premillinial dispensationalism.

By: a simple blogtrotter

a simple blogtrotter — Wed, 08 Mar 2006 23:15:46 +0000

…my wife just called me a dweeb for double-posting.

maybe this will get easier.

blogTRotter.

By: Michael Spencer

Michael Spencer — Wed, 08 Mar 2006 23:14:00 +0000

First of all…I am not an unquestioning fan of the emerging church. My basic stance is one of openness to a number of things that TRs want to hear nothing of.

You’ve read no blanket endorsements of Mclaren on this blog. He raises good questions.

I could argue with a number of PJohnson’s points, but given his assumptions and position, this is a remarkably fair piece, and I think many ECers would agree, particularly those wanting the reformation to influence the future shape of the emerging church.

I think Phil gets the missional thing, and that is crucial.

I am embarassed to link at Emergent No. The hit job done on Tim Keller over there was….***words failing*** But I am sure a lot of blogs that find me obnoxious link to me at times.

By: a simple blogtrotter

a simple blogtrotter — Wed, 08 Mar 2006 23:04:55 +0000

First time poster here. I tried to post this once already, I will give it one more try. I have to confess first off that I am not really a fan of most of your points/positions on much. I do enjoy reading now and then. The great blog wars peeked my intrest in the Tavern.

So, let me see if I have this right: The iMonk just gave a favorable review of Pyro’s “Emergent Critique”…given at T.R.-fest 06 (The Shepherds Conference…I would love to have been there), and linked to Emergent No to give readers the full text? Is that correct?

By: a simple blogtrotter

a simple blogtrotter — Wed, 08 Mar 2006 22:55:08 +0000

First time poster here. I would not even call myself a “fan” of your points/positions on very many topics at all. But… I just want to make sure I am squared away on this post: The iMonk just gave a favorable review of the “Emerging Critique” written by Pyro at The T.R-fest (MacArthur’s Shepherds Conference, and linked to Emergent No to cite the full text? Is that correct?

As a T.R.-ish fellow me-self, I gotta say, this is…. well this is…

What is this again?