John MacArthur blaspheming Holy Ghost

[NorrinRadd]

Much material by J. Rodman Williams here.

Material by Gordon Fee here. (None of it free AFAICT.)

A good interview with Fee.

A page with a link to a half-hour teaching by Fee on how to study the Bible.

Wayne Grudem's page.

 

[joey_downunder]

Craig Keener's page is here. I'll see what else I can find. I believe Williams is deceased, but online articles may still be extant.

Thanks.
I'll show you the other side of the fence in return. http://www.davidcox.com.mx/library/31.04.12a_speaking_in_tongues.htm

www.sermonaudio.com (conservative point of view) gives a lot of links on Charismatic movement and so on too.

 

[Biblicist]

Thanks.
I'll show you the other side of the fence in return. Speaking in Tongues

www.sermonaudio.com (conservative point of view) gives a lot of links on Charismatic movement and so on too.

I went and had a quick browse through Coxs' site but he seems to be presenting more of a fringe cessationist view; I suspect that most thoughtful cessationists would find his site to be a bit disturbing as he has some pretty odd and weird ideas.

 

[NorrinRadd]

Thanks.
I'll show you the other side of the fence in return. Speaking in Tongues

www.sermonaudio.com (conservative point of view) gives a lot of links on Charismatic movement and so on too.

Thanks... although in fairness, I didn't ask. I've heard the "other side" for over 30 years and engaged it in debates and discussions scores of times over the past 15 or more years -- here at CF, at CARM, and in various other venues.

But I will take a look at your links, if I can. Currently Cox's site is not responding.


Edit: Ok, I see it now. I've seen it before. Frankly, it's not worth my time. It's obvious from the first two paragraphs in his Overview that his basic hermeneutical approach is different from mine. It's like asking, "What color is that paint," and getting the answer, "Hang on, I'll get a yardstick and measure it."

However, if his view is representative of yours and you want to discuss why I disagree, I'd be willing to spend some time dissecting his dissertation in an annoyingly pedantic fashion.

 

[NorrinRadd]

Sorry I missed this.

Have I made any argument in this thread about apostolic succession or unbroken continuity?

Perhaps you should refrain from putting arguments into my mouth and address what I actually said.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I've had hundreds of these arguments/discussions/debates over the past 15 years or so, and usually the end result is that many words are exchanged, but neither "side" changes its view. In many cases, it turns out that a lot of those exchanged words could have been saved if the parties realized sooner that they were proceeding from different starting points.

"NT Scholars" meaning scholars from reputable universities like Yale, or NT Scholars meaning "bible college" type folks? Because I don't think you'll like what real bible scholars have to say about glossolalia... or what historians and sociologists would say about the modern Azuza Street revival.

I'm sure each of us comes to this discussion with his own form of elitism well in hand. This is the sort of occult preconception I was trying to lay openly on the table in the unintentional point of contention above.

Biblicist in post #73 elaborates better than I could. (I note in passing that just this past Christmas I got my first books by Stronstadt and Macchia, and now I see a bunch more names I'll need to sample.)

Problem is, you'd have to find somebody trustworthy willing to agree with you about the notion that "Psalm 149-150 behavior", if you can even say such a thing, looked anything like that.

Good luck.

Praising and exulting with dancing, shouts (elsewhere in Psalms), and a variety of noisy instruments also does not sound like the typical "traditional" church service, with organ music and relatively solemn singing. Anyone who can't see that is not someone I'd consider "trustworthy" to say what it DOES look like.

I'm fine with all those things, too. They were not what the video contained.

Besides, that was some really amateur moshing and headbanging. if King David was jamming out back in the day, he'd have had better swagger than that. Give him some credit.

The video provided nothing of probative value. It is an excerpt of less than 100 seconds from a service of unknown length. We know nothing of the actual context, and because of the overlaid music, don't know what was actually being said or sung.

 

[Biblicist]

By [FONT=&quot]Cappadociou:[/FONT][FONT=&quot]"NT Scholars" meaning scholars from reputable universities like Yale, or NT Scholars meaning "bible college" type folks? Because I don't think you'll like what real bible scholars have to say about glossolalia... or what historians and sociologists would say about the modern Azuza Street revival.[/FONT]

I'm sure each of us comes to this discussion with his own form of elitism well in hand. This is the sort of occult preconception I was trying to lay openly on the table in the unintentional point of contention above.

Biblicist in post #73 elaborates better than I could. (I note in passing that just this past Christmas I got my first books by Stronstadt and Macchia, and now I see a bunch more names I'll need to sample.)

I have just purchased my first book by Macchia titled The Baptism in the Holy Spirit. From what I can tell from the comments by other academics, this book seems to be the primary contemporary work on the topic and so far I have found it to be a very indepth treatment of the subject; I hate to think how many times that I have had to re-read page 6 as I think that I have not quite understood a few key points. I don’t have any books by Stronstadt but as you have done, I will have to add him to my ever increasing list of important Pneumatic texts to obtain…it’s never ending!

I had to chuckle with the comment made by Cappadocious “Because I don't think you'll like what real bible scholars have to say about glossolalia...” His comment may have accurately reflected the poor state of the academic world prior to the early 80’s but for the past 20 years or more it would be a rather less than astute academic who would dare say that tongues are not for today. We only has to look at two very important academics, Thiselton and Gardner as neither speak in tongues but they have both produced two very important works on 1st Corinthians and much of their material follows along Pentecostal lines. Thiselton in his monumental work on 1st Corinthians spent around 20 pages on 1Co 12:10c which is about tongues and Gardner had about three pages.

In our day and age, any academic who dares to promote a cessationist worldview may be considered to be somewhat of a relic as their now dated views certainly belong back to the era of the dinosaurs.

 

[joey_downunder]

Thanks... although in fairness, I didn't ask. I've heard the "other side" for over 30 years and engaged it in debates and discussions scores of times over the past 15 or more years -- here at CF, at CARM, and in various other venues.

Then you'll know that an ex-Charismatic is as hard to win over as a very militant anti-smoking *EX*smoker.

....However, if his view is representative of yours and you want to discuss why I disagree, I'd be willing to spend some time dissecting his dissertation in an annoyingly pedantic fashion.

His website clearly says it is a library and to remember not everything there is biblical! Libraries generally give a wide range of materials - even disproven ones e.g. anti-Holocaust, anti-immunization, pro-$cientology....

I really think if you want to discuss cessationism versus continuationism you should start another new thread. It looks like the topic here has pretty well finished.

 

[NorrinRadd]

...
I really think if you want to discuss cessationism versus continuationism you should start another new thread. It looks like the topic here has pretty well finished.

No thanks. I probably don't "start" more than two or three threads a year, if that many.

 

[sunlover1]

"God baptizes the obedient with the Holy Ghost with either the gift of tongues, or prophesy, or both (and many other gifts of the Holy Spirit) follow them. Satan is against the baptism and the gifts. The servants of Satan are also against them. John MacArthur is one of their leaders. Are you a servant of Satan or a servant of God?"

Corinthians Church and John MacArthur blaspheming Holy Ghost - YouTube

Hi Woodpecker.
I didn't watch the video, but I did stop listening to MacArthur years ago when
I found he was preaching that tongues was wrong.
Really enjoyed some of his sermons till he started in on tongues.

 

[FireDragon76]

you do not have the right to make that judgment ("Do I believe that every church where dozens, if not hundreds, of people are a cacaphony of noise is real glossolalia? No").. Paul speaks of two types of tongues, one to edify the church, the other to edify the believer.
.

He's entitled to his opinion. I definitely believe in spiritual gifts and charismata, that people are gifted by God with various abilities, but I don't think speaking in tongues is all that important to this. I've not felt the Holy Spirit at some "charismatic" services I've been to, either. Too much is made of ecstatic or emotional behaviors, when the Bible is clear what the gifts of the Holy Spirit really are- the Fruits of the Holy Spirit that are normative for every follower of Christ. Some Pentecostals/charismatics can assume that those from more liturgical or traditioanal churches don't have experiences of the Holy Spirit simply because they do not speak in tongues or because their worship or piety is more introverted and subdued, but this is simply not the case.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Hi Woodpecker.
I didn't watch the video, but I did stop listening to MacArthur years ago when
I found he was preaching that tongues was wrong.
Really enjoyed some of his sermons till he started in on tongues.

Someone posted one of his websites as if to promote it,
so not knowing anything that he was teaching I went to check it out and verify it or not.
He not only doesn't believe in evidence of the holy Spirit,
he says no one can be born again, or be immersed in the holy Spirit, or live in the new life/ power of resurrection
until AFTER they physically DIE.
That of course is entirely contrary to all that Jesus taught the apostles and disciples and all they taught as they lived His Life in the New Testament and it was recorded in the New Testament.

I don't even know if mcrthr has the "form of religion" or not, but definitely he denied the "power of Christ" outright,
as warned about by Jesus/ Scripture/ OT and NT.

 

[Geralt]

you don't even have any proof or basis the "sha la la la la, etc.." words people are saying which they claim as speaking in tongues today are the true speaking in tongues Paul was referring to in scripture. pentecostals and charismatics simply assumed it to be. its more like a tool of hypnotizing oneself within the backdrop of a peer pressuring culture.​

this was noy intended to be a discussion on if the gifts are still available today, I know they are, for I sing and pray in tongues, and have seen all the gifts that Paul mentions to the church of Corinth except someone being raised from the dead, but I have read stories where others have.

If you listen to the video it is about how John MacArthur (and other Christians) teach that speaking of tongues today is of Satan. This is a serious accusation against the Holy Spirit. The Pharisees called Jesus's miracles of Satan, and Jesus said this sin against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.

As Christians we should be very, very careful calling the works of the Holy Spirit demonic!

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Does anyone remember what Scripture says, instead of what some , how'd you put it? lala church says ?
There is great deception today, all over the world.
Remember what is written - that is the Standard; NOT experience, feelings, or church teachings.
Scripture is the TEST,
just as the Bereans knew, and all the Apostles, and ekklesia immersed in Yeshua's Name.

 

[mark kennedy]

"God baptizes the obedient with the Holy Ghost with either the gift of tongues, or prophesy, or both (and many other gifts of the Holy Spirit) follow them. Satan is against the baptism and the gifts. The servants of Satan are also against them. John MacArthur is one of their leaders. Are you a servant of Satan or a servant of God?"

Corinthians Church and John MacArthur blaspheming Holy Ghost - YouTube

I only listened to a little of the utube video but I'm familar with what John MacArthur teaches regarding tongues. What he teaches is that what Pentecostals and Charismatics are doing isn't New Testament tongues, in fact it's more like pagan ecstasies. He thinks part of the problem in Corinth was the fact that they were including pagan ecstasies in their worship. In his series, The Truth about Tongues, he says tongue today are just learned behavior. He cites a cooperative investigation with the Lutheran Church and the Mental Health association and after ten years they decided it was learned behavior, that was his conclusion as well. He never said it's of the devil. His actual lessons are found here:

Speaking in Tongues Grace to You

I encountered his teaching years ago when I was being confronted by Apostolics, the Jesus only crowd that denies the trinity and teaches you have to speak in tongues in order to be saved. The evangelical response was sparse and Biblical expositions on the topic were almost non-existent. I found the study invaluable at a time when I was profoundly confused by a doctrine that had absolutely no basis in Scripture, it was all existential experience. I notice you didn't bother to quote him or offer any proof texts, that's not how you prove someone is being slanderous (the literal meaning of blasphemy) toward the Holy Spirit. In this case I'd say it's a formula for slandering a lesson you either don't understand or for whatever reason choose to misrepresent.

I watched the video myself, MacArthur said speaking in tongues was of Satan. So he did blasphemy the Holy Spirit.

The man in the video is speaking truth or I would not put on this forum!!

All I've seen so far is you posting links and slandering John MacArthur. I know what he teaches and he never said that.

I took the time to watch/listen to both of the videos as posted in the OP as well as post #4. I think, Woodpecker, that the title of this thread is both misleading and slanderous to MacArthur.

First off, I don't see any relationship between the two videos. MacArthur doesn't even talk about the Corinthian church in his video. His video is almost entirely devoted to instruction about who the Holy Spirit is and what He does.

MacArthur does spend a few minutes talking about the New Apostolic Reformation movement, which I don't know much about. According to MacArthur, though, the followers of this movement attribute things to the Holy Spirit that have no business being attributed to Him. This certainly doesn't make MacArthur a "servant of Satan"!

MacArthur in no way blasphemes the Holy Ghost, as the title of this thread implies. Quite the opposite -- he exalts Him and spends nearly the entire video proclaiming His holiness and worthiness to be worshiped.

Woodpecker, I think that at the very least you should be apologizing for this thread, and at the most I think the whole thread should be deleted. It's misleading, it's outright wrong, and it's slanderous.

I know where they are getting this, John teaches that glossialaia is common in paganism, strongly contrasting that kind of gibberish with New Testament tongues. He says that the ecstatic gibberish tongues is still common in pagan traditions, using the Zulus as an example.

If you study the Greco-Roman world in the time of the Corinthian church, you would know that they had various priest and priestesses, and people who were devotees of the gods would go to these great temples and they would worship these priests and priestesses. And it was very common for a devotee would go into an ecstasy. And ecstasy means “to go out of oneself.” That’s the literal meaning of the word, to go out of yourself.

They would literally flip out and they would go into an unconscious state, in which they would have all kinds of phenomena occur, a psychic kind of phenomena. They would believe that when they went out of themselves, they literally left the body, and they ascended into space and they connected to deity, whatever deity they were worshiping, and they began with the deity. (The Truth About Tongues, John MacArthur)
​

Now I have studied the history of the Pentecostal movement and they are wonderful soul winners. I have actually gotten a lot of my theology from Wesleyan theology, Pentecostalism is the Wesleyan entire sanctification doctrine, as evidenced by speaking in tongues. I don't believe they are speaking in New Testament tongues but I do believe they are New Testament Christians.

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

A few months ago, someone not experienced in YHWH'S WORD posted a reference to mac****** with a link to one of his something or other (teachings).
I visited the link and read long enough to see that he did not believe a person could live in the life and power of Y'SHUA (could not be re-born nor have resurrection life) UNTIL they had passed from this lifetime. I didn't and don't agree with that and recommended to them that they take down the link, which they did.
I don't remember or know what link that was, so I goooogled just now :
< "john macarthur" not reborn until you die >
and
found immediately some results that I think
anyone should look at before trusting anything he says.
i.e. search it out, test the teachings, same as for anyone not just this one, before accepting.

I do not recommend searching nor reading nor accepting anything he says nor anyone who he approves of nor anyone who approves of him, fwiw.
i.e. searching to see only the same as the testing SCRIPTURE says to do,
if someone already has been tricked by him and yet really and truly wants to know the truth - and values the truth more than what any man says.

 

[mark kennedy]

A few months ago, someone not experienced in YHWH'S WORD posted a reference to mac****** with a link to one of his something or other (teachings).
I visited the link and read long enough to see that he did not believe a person could live in the life and power of Y'SHUA (could not be re-born nor have resurrection life) UNTIL they had passed from this lifetime. I didn't and don't agree with that and recommended to them that they take down the link, which they did.
I don't remember or know what link that was, so I goooogled just now :
< "john macarthur" not reborn until you die >
and
found immediately some results that I think
anyone should look at before trusting anything he says.
i.e. search it out, test the teachings, same as for anyone not just this one, before accepting.

I do not recommend searching nor reading nor accepting anything he says nor anyone who he approves of nor anyone who approves of him, fwiw.
i.e. searching to see only the same as the testing SCRIPTURE says to do,
if someone already has been tricked by him and yet really and truly wants to know the truth - and values the truth more than what any man says.

I have listened to what he says, I know his doctrinal position and you have not quoted him once. There is no basis for what you are saying and I think your just looking for something harsh to say, not caring whether it's true or false. Every lesson on Grace to You has a transcript option so you would no trouble copying and pasting the offensive material. You could at least offer the title of the lesson, but you don't do that. What your saying is rude, rambling and wrong. My guess is that your not opposed to him because he taught this or that, you don't like him because he is an evangelical.

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I didn't even know anything about him, including if he is an evangelical as you say.

I don't have the original reference I looked up from someone else's link, so as I said

I searched again to see what's up.

The search revealed far worse than I thought before - and it doesn't matter what I think or what you think.

If someone wants to know the truth, they will TEST as SCRIPTURE says to. This includes searching as I did to see what has been already revealed about that one you like for whatever reason.

Since many false prophets and many false teachers abound out there, and millions of people follow them, it is not a good idea to accept anyone without checking out if they tell the truth or not according to Scripture.

If you want the lies he tells (contrary to Scripture) spread out over this forum, go ahead, do what you want you do.

 

[mark kennedy]

I didn't even know anything about him, including if he is an evangelical as you say.

I don't have the original reference I looked up from someone else's link, so as I said

I searched again to see what's up.

The search revealed far worse than I thought before - and it doesn't matter what I think or what you think.

If someone wants to know the truth, they will TEST as SCRIPTURE says to. This includes searching as I did to see what has been already revealed about that one you like for whatever reason.

Since many false prophets and many false teachers abound out there, and millions of people follow them, it is not a good idea to accept anyone without checking out if they tell the truth or not according to Scripture.

If you want the lies he tells (contrary to Scripture) spread out over this forum, go ahead, do what you want you do.

So you want to call him a liar and a false teacher and you preface that with actually admitting you know nothing about him. It's easy enough to know what he teaches, his lessons are on Grace to You and frankly I haven't seen you put anything to the test of Scripture. You seldom quote Scripture and your going to make these scathing indictments against someone you know nothing about.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

So you want to call him a liar and a false teacher and you preface that with actually admitting you know nothing about him.

Can't you read? I said I knew nothing about him.
I followed someone else's link who was promoting him.
In the link, his own teachings, were contrary to Scripture.

When I goooogled to see if I could find the link again,
I couldn't (it was last year sometime).

Instead, I found many others likewise who found and exposed his false antichrist teachings.

Like many other false prophets and false teachers today,
he's been exposed.
There are many - I don't think anyone should watch any of them nor study them - there's NO DIRECTIVE in Scripture to follow someone with false teaching, NOR to study them.

 

[High Fidelity]

So you want to call him a liar and a false teacher and you preface that with actually admitting you know nothing about him. It's easy enough to know what he teaches, his lessons are on Grace to You and frankly I haven't seen you put anything to the test of Scripture. You seldom quote Scripture and your going to make these scathing indictments against someone you know nothing about.

I don't think the poster has anything against MacArthur.

As far as MacArthur is concerned, I don't agree with him on everything, but he is, without doubt, one of the greatest expositors of Scripture in our age, at the very least.

A lot of people don't like what he has to say because of his to-the-point attitude that cuts through superstition, experiential nonsense and what men claim; he goes to the source and lets it speak for itself, as any good Pastor and expositor of Scripture should.