3,000 Evangelicals, Churches Join John MacArthur in Statement Against 'Nebulous' Social Justice
More than 3,000 evangelical Christians and organizations have joined well-known theologian and pastor, John MacArthur, in endorsing a statement on social justice and the purported dangers the concept poses to the Gospel.
The statement comes in the wake of MacArthur's recent controversial series that brands social justice as a real threat to the Gospel.
"Clarity on these issues will fortify believers and churches to withstand an onslaught of dangerous and false teachings that threaten the gospel, misrepresent Scripture, and lead people away from the grace of God in Jesus Christ," the statement explains in an introduction.
"Specifically, we are deeply concerned that values borrowed from secular culture are currently undermining Scripture in the areas of race and ethnicity, manhood and womanhood, and human sexuality. The Bible's teaching on each of these subjects is being challenged under the...
G. Bird wrote: I am King James Bible only and live in England. I regard all other translations as inferior.
North Road Chapel, Bideford, is a KJV chapel; it could be described as a Doctrines of Grace non-denominational Brethren Assembly.
Chase, I received this morning from a very gracious brother, photographs by email of John MacArthur's Study Bible, which were focussed on his notes from Matthew 19:16-22. Now I am happy to be able to say that the notes on that passage were of no different character to saints of old, like Bishop Ryle (commentary) or in any way contrary to the great confessions such as the Westminster Confession of faith or the 1689 Baptist Confession (my own confession).
It makes what he said on the YouTube video a bit puzzling to say the least, but if what he says in his Bible Notes is his solid viewpoint, then I have no problem with that, and take back what I said about him.
However, I still have many reservations concerning both the man and his ministry.
Dispensationalists have been great missionaries [URL=http://tinyurl.com/yd9r3mfz]]]https://tinyurl.com/yd9r3mfz (A Short History Of Dispensationalism)[/URL]
The four foundations of dispensationalism according to Dr. Ice, but first Wikipedia had a pretty good list though not exactly identical to his. One of the precepts a pointed out, should be taking note of:
Wikipedia wrote: Other proposed distinctions: law and grace
...In other words, they teach that law contains no grace, and that grace is not conditioned on keeping the law. This does not mean that grace was missing from the dispensation of law, only that the law itself was diametrically opposed to grace, which operated by other means (such as promises and blessings)....
Dr. Ice: [URL=http://tinyurl.com/y9ghwgyg]]] The First Foundation: Consistent Literal Interpretation [/URL], [URL=https://tinyurl.com/y8vw5tmc]]] Premillennialism: The Second Foundation [/URL], [URL=https://tinyurl.com/y6wwj7vc]]] Futurism: The Third Foundation [/URL], and [URL=https://tinyurl.com/yaq8eafo]]] Israel / Church Distinction: The 4th Foundation [/URL].
John UK wrote,"We don't have KJV-Onlyists in the UK, unless they are weird IFB's from America come to missionise the country." With the overwhelming majority of British people lost and on the way to hell (just like the vast majority of Americans), and with churches dying and mosques thriving, the UK is no less a valid mission field than the pagan lands of Asia and Africa. Thank God there are a few "weird IFBs from America" taking the gospel back to land that once sent it to our shores, the land that my ancestors fled to escape religious persecution. I am honored to be a supporter of some of those "weird IFBs" who have left home to win souls and plant King James Bible-believing churches in the United Kingdom.
Chase, a most noticeable thing has occurred among the denominations (with certain exceptions like Ian Paisley's Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster, and other like-minded groups, now very few), where their statement of faith has been altered so that it more politically or intellectually-correct, concerning the inspiration of scripture. It is this. The only thing to be inspired is the original autographs. So if you have the originals, you have an inspired and inerrant Bible. And if you don't, you don't have an inerrant and inspired Bible. Can you see where that leads?
The modern versionists, by which I mean NASB, NIV et al, none of them believe their Bible is inerrant and inspired. Well, of course they don't, because there are differences between them.
Now as to your query about whether or not I am sincere concerning my question, yes I am. I am looking for the punch line after Jesus has expounded some (not all) of the decalogue, what is he telling the young man he must do to be saved?
John MacArthur has changed his thinking on the eternal sonship of Christ, formerly believing that Christ became God's Son at his incarnation, so maybe he changed on this also. That's fine if true. Has he?
John UK; So did God inspire the original autographs or the Textus Receptus? Or both? I would emphatically hold to the view that God but His Holy Spirit inspired the writers of the New Testament and therefore the original autographs are inspired. By means of textual critical work with bodies of Greek texts like the Textus Receptus we know that our English translations are accurate and truly the Word or God. You have quite a view of the authorized version, KJV. I am not one to denote itâ€™s significance down throughout history by any means or suggest that it is useless today. However we do now possess more literal translations with more manuscripts, like ESV and NASB. Not a hill to die on though, people get very heated on that subject. Itâ€™s hard to tell if your inquiry about MacArthurs notes on Matthew 19:16-22 is genuine, but one of the Bibleâ€™s I own is a MacArthur study Bible. What specific verse or section of a verse would you like to know? The notes arenâ€™t exactly a quick jotting down of a couple words. That is, if that was a genuine request.
Chase wrote: John UK, Just curious, are you a KJVonlyist?
We don't have KJV-Onlyists in the UK, unless they are weird IFB's from America come to missionise the country.
However, we do have a few saints left who take time to study and research the subject of God's word and where it is today, such as the Trinitarian Bible Society, one of the very few societies who have not joined with the [ecumenical] United Bible Societies.
I am one of the few saints left on this planet who believes in an inerrant and inspired Bible, which in the NT is the Textus Receptus, from which many Bibles have been translated into English, culminating in the grand and unsurpassed Authorized Version (KJV) which has never yet been bettered, even with its small blemishes, gained not from translational errors but kingly mandates.
Drs Westcott & Hort are big deceivers who have got you, hook, line and sinker, as they and their disciples have got most of christendom. And now look at what the church is like!
BTW Chase, if you have The MacArthur NT Commentary, can you see if John has changed his thinking on Matthew 19:16-22 concerning what the gospel says to sinners? He may have changed since that video. Thanks.
David Grimes; I appreciate your graciousness. I most definitely not concluding that obedience is required for salvation, I am saying that obedience in a necessary OUTCOME of that salvation (justification). Sanctification necessitates that, or else what is sanctification if not the progressive conforming to Christ until Christ returns and we are glorified? Hopefully that makes my position clear, perhaps John UK had something to do with that confusion. Just as he and others seem confused about MacArthurs gospel presentation.
David Grimes wrote: Hey John UK. Another reason to read KJV.
Romans 10:4 KJV (4)Â For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.
Romans 10:8-9 KJV (8)Â But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; (9)Â That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Romans 10:11 KJV (11)Â For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
Romans 10:13 KJV (13)Â For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Acts 16:31 KJV (31)Â And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
John 3:16 KJV (16)Â For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
@ Allie. I totally agree with you and thank you for sharing your thoughts. God has placed us where we are at and expects us to bloom where we are at this moment. We carry the name of Christ and should live our lives like we do. I want my light to shine I want to help people by sharing what Christ has brought into my life, joy unspeakable and full of glory. If I am practicing sin (living together without marriage, homosexual marriage, and any other sin in our lives that is causing us to be in bondage) We will fail at times but know it and immediately turn to Him for forgiveness. He discplines those that are his children until they learn some very important lessons. I have been there and it is not a pleasant place to be. I turn to Christ and even grow during these because He discplines out of His love for His own. Read Hebrews and the lives of his own disciples, Peter who was told by Paul how wrong he was when he refused to eat with the Gentiles when he was around his friends the Judaizing Jews that were sent by James. Galatians 2:11-14. Thatâ€™s why I have morning Devotionals to prepare for whatever I have to face that day.
Indeed, DG. I believe the teaching of the Bible is that faith alone saves (Ephesians 2:8-9), but that faith that remains alone was not saving faith to begin with (verse 10). While Christians can and all too often do backslide, good works are the only concrete evidence that they ever "frontslid." Works do not save people, but the consistent teaching of the Bible is that saved people work.
Thanks US, and David, I didn't mean to neglect addressing you as well last night...sorry for that. I'm interested to know what you think of my thoughts on it. Basically, this is about the word, "dead", and whether a true blue saving faith can live and die, so to speak, and exist as a stand-alone, outside of the fruits of the Spirit, or if one can't exist without the other. Faith and works is my position, with faith or works being impossible from a salvation aspect.