BLESSED IN HIS SIGHT IS THE DEATH OF HIS SAINTS - A TRIBUTE TO JOHN MACARTHUR

Courtesy of IslandsEdge, posted on Wikipedia

 Becky and I have been talking about going out west sometime and visit friends in California and Arizona, and one thing Becky wanted to do was to hear John MacArthur preach at Grace Community Church.  That plan got scrapped when MacArthur was called to his heavenly home, July 14, 2025, at age 86 (the same age my Dad was when he passed in 2019).

My first introduction to him was at Bible College. In '79, Professor David Nicholas gave the Charismatic movement as a term paper subject in Hermeneutics (Biblical Interpretation) class, but said that anyone who did that subject (I did) needed to get MacArthur's book "The Charismatics" (I did). At that same time, a series based on the book was published in Moody Monthly.

Even though I moved back to Southern California after that for a short period time, I didn't follow him much, but when I pastored a church in Nebraska, a friend mentioned his tape ministry. Then, when I moved to Nashville, TN a year later, I listened to him occasionally on radio.

In '90, I got a copy of "The Gospel According To Jesus" from a friend. I didn't start reading it till four years later, but that book impacted my life. So did "Ashamed of the Gospel," which focused on pragmatism in the church.

As you may know, MacArthur didn't shy away from controversy, but one underlying thing is he stood solidly on the authority of Scripture and on expository preaching, and these items had a connection to his stand on those disputes. Two of those debates have been alluded to above. I had a friend at church who said he had a problem with MacArthur, because of their differing stands on the Charismatic movement. The funny thing is when I gave a quote from the MacArthur Study Bible (which I referred to as the Big Mac - if you saw a copy, you could see why), that friend usually admitted he agreed with MacArthur on that point. The other was with "The Gospel According To Jesus," which basically said that if a person is born again, there will be changes in his life.

Two recent things that MacArthur did which I agree. One was how he handled COVID. Some of the church felt the Biblical command to assemble together (Hebrews 10:24-25) was more important than keeping California Governor Newsom's lockdown. The church was fined by the government, but MacArthur was ready to go to court about it, and asked the state to give proof the lockdown measures worked. The state dropped the case, agreeing to drop the fines, pay the court fees and to not file any subsequent charges. The other was his support of the Legacy Standard Bible, which was consistent in transliterating Yahweh instead of using "The Lord" or "God" in all caps. 

After his death a couple of weeks ago, I've read some posts and a couple of videos about his death. All of which were mostly positive, pointing out his solid stand on the Bible and expository preaching though one of the videos brought out the differences between MacArthur and his friend/fellow minister John Piper in a way that was definitely unnecessarily overdramatic. The article from Daniel Silliman in Christianity did balance the positive with some questions on the issues mentioned above and his views on women in the church (particularly Beth Moore). I did find it interesting it seemed to overlook the COVID issue.

Like J. Vernon McGee, MacArthur is in heaven but will continue to minister on earth. Grace to You has stated they will continue airing MacArthur's sermons. I'm glad. 

BOOK REVIEW - "YOUNG, RESTLESS, REFORMED: A JOURNALIST'S JOURNEY WITH THE NEW CALVINISTS" BY COLLIN HANSEN

 

I first heard of this book on Trevin Wax's Reconstructing Faith podcast, and soon read about it in another book I recently read ("Killing Calvinism" by Greg Dutcher). So I checked this book out.

In "Young, Restless, Reformed," journalist Collin Hansen investigates the modern resurgence of Calvinism. When Emerging Christianity seemed to be the fad of the day, Hansen went to various places where he found traditional Calvinism was alive and strong.

Hansen goes to various locations, such as the Passion Conference, Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minnesota where John Piper is the pastor, and The Southern Theological Seminary which saw a revival in Biblical inerrancy as well as Calvinism.

My opinion? This book is more of a journal of Calvinism's rebirth, interviewing not just the big names but young people who were influenced as well. It reviews people getting into Calvinism not as one trying to convince the unconvinced but a reporter telling what influenced his interviewees' lives.

I recommend this book.

REVIEW - "HERE WE STAND: 31 REFORMERS, 1 PER DAY" BY DESIRING GOD

 Okay, how do I classify this? Is it a book? If so, it would be a good one, But there is no indication of it being published. Desiring God, connected to John Piper, released this on-line. When I saw it promoted in September, I signed up to receive it each day throughout October in honor of Reformation Day. I'm glad I did - it was a blessing.

How many reformers can you think of? I'll give you my list, and see how you do with it:

• John Wycliffe
• William Tyndale
• Jan Huss
• Simon Menno
• Peter Waldo
• Mr. and Mrs. Martin Luther (the latter was the first person Warren Wiersbe introduced in "50 People Every Christian Should Know")
• Philip Melanchthon (my hero and personal favorite)
• Ulrich Zwingli
• John Knox
• John Calvin
• Theodore Beza
• Jacob Arminius

There are others I'd also think of, like Charles Simeon, Matthew Henry, John and Charles Wesley, George Whitfield, and Isaac Watts, but all these were too recent for this list. And I have a hunch my list of 13 is impressive, but short of what they had. By the way, only one I listed was not covered, meaning they had 18 or so (they had at least one pair included the same day) I hadn't heard of.

The list was full of variations. They had pre-reformers like Wycliffe and Hus, Anabaptists like Waldo and Menno, "Bride of the Reformation" Wibrandis Rosenblatt who married and was widowed by four reformers (three of which were also included in the list), and non-theologian Johannes Gutenberg whose printing press helped the Reformation have the effect it did.

I don't know how to find this collection - they didn't post it on Facebook, and as I mentioned above, it hasn't been published. But I recommend it. However, I was unsurprisingly disappointed they didn't have the guts to include Jacob Arminius! But then, they might have been disowned by their Calvinist brethren. And maybe, like the others I mentioned, Arminius may have been a little too late for this list. 

Allow me this brief post-script - I'm posting this on International Day of Prayer for the Persecuted Church. It's appropriate - many of them like Luther and Calvin had to flee from one place to a safer one, while others like Tyndale and Zqingli paid the ultimate price.

TIPTOE-ING THROUGH (AND AROUND AND ON RARE OCCASSIONS ON) THE TULIPS, PART 3 OF 3: THOUGHTS TO CONSIDER

Calvinist Charles Simeon on left, Arminian John Wesley on right.

Just three installments on Calvinism vs. Arminianism? True, the blogs are long, but is this doing the subject justice? 

Consider: My purpose is not to promote one theology over the other, because both are held by godly but imperfect men who have searched the Scripture. Rather, my goal is to help us realize that the other side of the debate is NOT the enemy. I believe the time is coming that we'll find ourselves sharing a jail cell with believers who differ in theology but share our love and devotion for Christ; thus, we need to encourage each other, not try to win an argument.

So allow me to give several bullet points of things to think about.

1. WHAT MODEL OF CAR WAS THAT?

    One of my college classmates was in a car wreck, so two other friends asked his roommate (interestingly, Tom Cousins, who introduced me to Calvinism vs. Arminianism) the important question: what make was the car? One thought it was one kind of car, and the other thought it was a different kind. Cousins laughed, and said it was a custom car, with the front end being one make and the back the other. In other words, both were right, but not completely.

    I've heard some use the argument, "We can both be wrong, but we both can't be right." Usually, they mean, "I believe I'm right, but I know you're wrong;" they really don't consider that I'm right and they're wrong as a possiblility. But they've missed two other options: 1) That neither is wrong, like my friends and the wrecked car, and 2) In eternity, it doesn't really matter who's right: We're to love one another.

2. ARE MY IDIOSYNCRASIES PREDESTINED?

    Remember the days when Baskins and Robbins was known as 31 flavors? Each month they had a selection of 31 varieties of Ice Cream, Sherbet, and Ices, and, of course, chocolate, strawberry, and vanilla. Do you know how many possibilities to mix and match for getting a two dip cone? I do: Five hundred ninety five! So how many choices do I have? Would you believe 10? On a good month, it might be 15, and a great month it would be 21!

    I'm sure you're scratching your head, since there are more flavors (31, and of course, chocolate, strawberry, and vanilla) than the largest number I gave. And why did I give three exact numbers? Well, let me explain.

    Before I walk in the store and get the list of 31 (and of course, chocolate, strawberry, and vanilla), I've mentally discarded any option with chocolate, strawberry and vanilla: I can get those anyplace! Plus, I know I won't be limiting myself to one flavor. Then I pick up the list and usually I find five flavors that interest me, which cuts it down to ten choices! On a good month I might have six attention grabbing flavors (15 choices), and maybe even seven (21 choices).

    Of course, just because I quickly eliminated 585 choices for me doesn't mean the guy behind me will choose two scoops of chocolate. It is just me; it's the way I'm made. But did I make myself that way? Let's look at Psalm 33:15-"He fashions their hearts individually, He considers (or understands) all their works."

    To the topic I'm dealing with, is it possible that those who are drawn to the Gospel are drawn because God fashioned their hearts to be drawn?

3. IS GOD THE MASTER SCRIPT WRITER OR THE MASTER CHESS PLAYER?

    I'll be honest. I shake my head in disbelief with the Calvinists who say that if God is sovereign, we can't have free will - even libertarian free will. 

    I'm impressed with the script writer who can work magic in story telling, but not as much as the chess player who watches you move and sees the next ten moves on both sides, allowing you to think you're making a great move as you're falling right into his trap. If God is sovereign as well as omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent, He is fully capable of allowing free will without worrying about how it affects His plans.

4. IS THERE A THIRD CHOICE BESIDES FREE WILL AND PREDESTINATION?

    I believe there is: Granted free will. God allows us to make a choice between options He in His sovereignty has chosen. We're not the ones who make the list of what we can do - God imposed His sovereign limits to our choices, and maybe He's comfortable enough to let us decide between two or more choices.

    Let me take it a step further. Total depravity (believed by Calvinists and Classic Arminians) says we're not able to obey God until the Spirit draws us. Both sides also believe we have free will after salvation - does God predestine His children to disobey Him? The Arminian believes that when the Spirit draws us, He gives us the ability to obey His call, in addition to the ability to disobey we're born with. Is the Calvinist saying that when the Spirit draws us, He both gives us the ability to obey and takes away the ability to disobey, and then a second later, restores the ability to disobey that as believer we don't really want?

5. IS IT POSSIBLE BOTH ARMINIANS AND CALVINISTS OVERESTIMATE FREE WILL AS EITHER A RIGHT WE HAVE OR AS A BOGEYMAN FALSE GOSPEL?

    But first a question: Do you remember who did a '70's hit called "Best of My Love?" I believe it's by a group that starts with an 'E'? I really liked that song. Okay, back to the topic at hand.

    How much free will do we have in reality? Do you chose your first name, middle name, last name, nationality, birth gender, hair color, eye color, skin color, place you grow up in, your parents, your siblings, or your grade school teachers? Does your free will ever get defeated by the free will of opposing sports teams and political parties or criminals? How is your free will helping get low gas prices or picking up every item you want at the grocery store or your favorite menu item at your restaurant?

    One thing that makes me cringe are the "We have a free will/God's a perfect gentleman and won't violate our free will." I'm sure Saul of Tarsus would say an amen to that. What? He won't? 

    I mentioned in the previous point the concept of Granted Free Will. The reality is that any free will we have is given by God. It's not a natural commodity. God's will WILL be done. 

    Oh, you're wondering why I asked about "Best of My Love?" You're telling me that was the classic song by the Eagles? No way. That song's totally depressing. The one I enjoy is upbeat. Oh, I remember. I'm thinking of the disco song by the Emotions. Same title, same era, performed by groups starting with the letter "E". And totally different songs.

    Guess what, Calvinists who claim free will is a false gospel? When I hear people talk about free will, I hear two songs as different as the Eagles and Emotions songs. When some people say "free will", they mean "self-sovereignty," and I'm with the Calvinists on how wrong they are. But other times, "free will" is better seen as human responsibility, and that type of Free will has less chance of being a false gospel as the Indiana Pacers have of winning the Super Bowl. (For the sports challenged, the Pacers will NEVER will a Super Bowl, since they're a basketball team.)

6. WHILE DISCUSSING POSSIBILITIES, COULD BOTH CALVINISM AND ARMINIANISM HAVE THEIR PLACE IN THIS WORLD?

    Here's a thought I have. If witnessing to someone who believes he's the captain of his own ship, shouldn't we point out to him he isn't, and that God is sovereign over every area of his life? Likewise, when dealing with a secular pre-determinist who denies free will, would it be important to tell him that God holds him responsible for every decision he makes?

7. CAN WE "HONOR ALL MEN" (1 PET. 2:17) BY NOT CREATING CARICATURES NOT BASED ON REALITY?

    I'll admit I see more of this from Calvinists than the other way around, but I have no doubt Arminians can be guilty of this as well. I saw one Calvinist quote Hebrews 7:25 - "Therefore He is able to save to the uttermost those who come to Christ through Him," then claim that Arminians and two Arminian groups don't believe in the "through Him." At that time, I was in the Society of Evangelical Arminians, and asked them if they agreed with that characterizaton. The response was an unanimous NO!!!

    Another oft-used argument is Calvinists claim Arminians believe we have to give God permission to save us. Is that true? Probably with the more semi-pelagian territory. However, I disagree. God gives us invitational imperatives: "Come and let us reason together" (Isa. 1:18); "If you're thirsty, come to the water" (Isa. 55:1); Come all that are weary and heavyChar laden" (Matt. 11:28). "Come" is both an invitation but also a command. If we obey and come, He saves us. If we disobey the command and don't come, then we face the consequences of disobedience.

    Allow me to wrap this long but hopefully thought provoking blog with this story.

    One of my heroes of the faith is Charles Simeon, for several reasons, including the story I'm sharing which I first read in Warren Wiersbe's 50 People Every Christian Should Know: Learning from Spiritual Giants of the Faith; John Piper also mentioned it in a blog. Below is an account of a conversation between Charles Simeon and John Wesley, thanks to Simeon's biographer Handley Carr Glyn Moule (pp.79ff). Allow me to write it as a script so it's easier to follow.

Simeon:  Sir, I understand that you are called an Arminian; and I have been sometimes called a Calvinist; and therefore I suppose we are to draw daggers.  But before I consent to begin the combat, with your permission I will ask you a few questions.  Pray, Sir, do you feel yourself a depraved creature, so depraved that you would never have thought of turning to God, if God had not first put it into your heart?

Wesley:  Yes, I do indeed.

Simeon:  And do you utterly despair of recommending yourself to God by anything you can do; and look for salvation solely through the blood and righteousness of Christ?

Wesley:  Yes, solely through Christ.

Simeon:  But, Sir, supposing you were at first saved by Christ, are you not somehow or other to save yourself afterwards by your own works?

Wesley:  No, I must be saved by Christ from first to last.

Simeon:  Allowing, then, that you were first turned by the grace of God, are you not in some way or other to keep yourself by your own power? 

Wesley:  No. 

Simeon:  What then, are you to be upheld every hour and every moment by God, as much as an infant in its mother's arms? 

Wesley:  Yes, altogether.  

Simeon:  And is all your hope in the grace and mercy of God to preserve you unto His heavenly kingdom? 

Wesley:  Yes, I have no hope but in Him. 

Simeon:  Then, Sir, with your leave I will put up my dagger again; for this is all my Calvinism; this is my election, my justification by faith, my final perseverance: it is in substance all that I hold, and as I hold it; and therefore, if you please, instead of searching out terms and phrases to be a ground of contention between us, we will cordially unite in those things where in we agree. 

Why can't we have more conversations with each other like this on the topic of Calvinism and Arminianism?