Is Evangelicalism a false religion?

Clare73 · Jan 23, 2021

Saint Steven said:
Though I was raised Evangelical, I have moved steadily away from it for most of my Christian life. To the point where I now see it as an exclusionary religion with a militant zeal for a theological platform.

When the church should be facing the world with open arms of acceptance and love,

Perhaps you would care to address the "open arms of acceptance and love" of Jesus in Mt 18:4-9, 23:13-36,
and then there's the apostle Paul in Gal 1:8-9, 5:12, who received his revelation from Jesus personally in the third heaven.
.

Clare73 · Jan 23, 2021

BrotherJJ said:
1. often Evangelist Any of the authors of the four Gospels in the New Testament, traditionally identified by the names Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
2. One who practices evangelism, especially a Protestant preacher or missionary.
3. One who promulgates or promotes something enthusiastically.

evangelist

Mark 16:15 Jesus said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

Acts 21:8 And the next day we that were of Paul's company departed, and came unto Caesarea: and we entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven; and abode with him.

2 Tim 4:5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.

In my opinion evangelicalism it's a fundamental directive given to every believer. Peace, JJ

Almost. . .Eph 4:11-12; Ro 12:7; 1Co 12:29-30.

chevyontheriver · Jan 23, 2021

Jesus is YHWH said:
The two of them need to sit down and discuss this together and openly. Just like on a forum sometimes we can talk past one another which seems to be the case in this video.

Either MacArthur is correct or he's not. Was he correct?

Clare73 · Jan 23, 2021

Saint Steven said:
This is a discussion. Weigh in.
For the purposes of this OP, John MacArthur is an Evangelical leader, he is representative of Evangelicalism. Agree or disagree?

Representative? Not quite. . .

John MacArthur is attacking Eastern Orthodoxy. Are you okay with that?
Is this a manifestation of a true, or false religion?

If MacArthur is attacking a perverted gospel (Gal 1:7) which requires works for justification, he is in complete agreement with Paul who curses (anathamatizes) those who do so (Gal 1:7-9).

So the question is: is Paul a manifestation of a true, or false religion?

Saint Steven · Jan 23, 2021

2PhiloVoid said:
Well, I empathize with you in what you're drawing out in your OP, Brother Steven. I think it's unfortunate that the term itself gets claimed by an assortment of both Protestants and some Catholics, because it then becomes an equivocal term that sometimes causes others to surmise that everyone else who identifies with it thinks the same way.

I'm sure that there are some other lifeforms under that same rock, but it might take a magnifying glass by which to spot them and differentiate them. From the sources I have, I think it's best to just keep in mind that there's a range of meanings on a spectrum for "Evangelicalism." Not all of them are as stiff as MacArthur's is.

I mean, I don't know. Maybe it's time to ditch the term since it's not conducive to clarity any longer?

Good points. Thanks for weighing in on this.

As per the OP, I was raised Evangelical, so I have some MacArthurism in my spiritual DNA, if you will. I helped to guard the fortress for years. And I still associate with folks that consider themselves Evangelical. Including my mother dearest.

Having changed my position in recent years on the doctrine of the final judgment to something more acceptable to the Eastern Orthodox position, the Evangelicals on the forum have turned against me. Now that I have been tossed out, I can see some things in my former associates that wasn't as clear prior. And now have a much better perspective on why people hate Christians. They can be quite unlovable at times.

Seeing the video in the OP put me over the edge. The side-by-side comparison made it so clear. I wanted to see if other felt the same way I do, saw the same thing I saw.

And it would be hypocritical for me to declare war on some segment of Christianity. That would make me as bad as those I criticize. In fact, I am planning to attend an Evangelical church for worship tomorrow. They are fine folks. Nothing like the example of MacArthurism we have seen today.

hedrick · Jan 23, 2021

Clare73 said:
Perhaps you would care to address the "open arms of acceptance and love" of Jesus in Mt 18:4-9, 23:13-36,
and then there's the apostle Paul in Gal 1:8-9, 5:12, who received his revelation from Jesus personally in the third heaven.
.

Interesting quotes. All are in fact about acceptance and love.

In Mat 18:4-9 it's acceptance of trusting children, and a warning about those who put roadblocks in front of those who trust in God.

Mat 23:13 ff is again about those who put roadblocks in front of those who would follow Jesus. In this case it's the Pharisees, known for rejecting people who didn't follow their elaborations on Biblical requirements.

Gal 1:8 and 5:12 criticize those oppose Paul's Gospel of grace. In this context it's adding legalistic requirements.

hedrick · Jan 23, 2021

Talking about "a false religion" is that kind of thing we don't need in talking about fellow Christians.

Evangelicalism was, like Methodism and Pietism before it, an attempt to restore heart religion for people who didn't find it in mainstream Protestantism. Also an emphasis on bringing Christ to others. Both of these are strong points.

Its weak points follow from its capture by the religious right. Evangelicals have to an unfortunate extent bought into conspiracy theory, whether the conspiracy is scientists, Biblical scholars, or honest election officials.

Clare73 · Jan 23, 2021

chevyontheriver said:
Evangelicalism has many good aspects. MacArthurism though, seems to concentrate on some of the worst aspects, most predominantly the historical anti-Catholicism which survives in evangelicalism. It's so bad in MacArthurism that he has to attack Orthodoxy too and an old friend. MacArthurism is a dogmatic blindness. Hannegraff aptly handled it by quoting James.

The spirit of MacArthurism is small. Hannegraff's is larger even though he manages to hold on to his own anti-Catholicism.

Reactionary theology is ill advised. MacArthurism is reactionary theology. Since time is short we believers should be working on a theology where we hang together because otherwise we will hang apart as militant secularism comes after us to destroy us. Will MacArthur maintain his superiority over other Christians and gleefully watch them imprisoned? We need some better theology than that. I'm not saying theological content does not matter. I'm not advocating theological mush. Just that MacArthurism is failing Christians. To the extent evangelicalism is MacArthurism, it's a failure. To the extent that evangelicalism and Orthodoxy are anti-Catholic they are failures. We need to figure out how to undo the 500 year rift of the reformation and the 1000 year old rift of the schism.

Until we do, the world doesn't have the witness to Christ that it should and we will all suffer, believers will suffer persecution and unbelievers will suffer without Christ.

The world hasn't had the witness to the gospel that it should since it hit the ground. . .with Paul having to condemn (Gal 1:7-9) the Judaizers.

Clare73 · Jan 23, 2021

Saint Steven said:
Basically, I turned over a rock labeled Evangelicalism and MacArthurism crawled out. (thanks to @chevyontheriver for the term MacArthurism)

Along with "Universalism"?

2PhiloVoid · Jan 23, 2021

Saint Steven said:
Good points. Thanks for weighing in on this.

As per the OP, I was raised Evangelical, so I have some MacArthurism in my spiritual DNA, if you will. I helped to guard the fortress for years. And I still associate with folks that consider themselves Evangelical. Including my mother dearest.

Having changed my position in recent years on the doctrine of the final judgment to something more acceptable to the Eastern Orthodox position, the Evangelicals on the forum have turned against me. Now that I have been tossed out, I can see some things in my former associates that wasn't as clear prior. And now have a much better perspective on why people hate Christians. They can be quite unlovable at times.

Seeing the video in the OP put me over the edge. The side-by-side comparison made it so clear. I wanted to see if other felt the same way I do, saw the same thing I saw.

And it would be hypocritical for me to declare war on some segment of Christianity. That would make me as bad as those I criticize. In fact, I am planning to attend an Evangelical church for worship tomorrow. They are fine folks. Nothing like the example of MacArthurism we have seen today.

I feel for you in all of that, Bro! I do. In fact, just for the record, here's a quick link to something I wrote about a week ago here on CF that is indirectly associated with both your own personal experience and your exploratory analysis of "evangelicalism." I think you'll see some similarities in our respective experiences:

"Non-denominational"??? What does that even mean?

I'll just say that I like your style and, like you, I'veHaanagraaf been influenced by MacArthur even in my own Christian life (I used to listen to him quite a lot on the radio back in the 1990s as I'd drive to work each day...) So, even though I didn't go to a strict MacArthur style Bible Church growing up, I can understand the knee-jerk reaction to all of this, especially since I listened to Hanegraaff probably three times as much as I did MacArthur, even on into the 2000's.

Clare73 · Jan 23, 2021

Saint Steven said:
As a Protestant, I have rarely even been inside a Catholic, or Eastern Orthodox church building. Both Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy claim to be the only true church. Thus inferring there is no other true church and that Protestants left the church.

But I don't recall ever hearing a Catholic, or Eastern Orthodox leader declaring Protestantism a false religion. But that happens from the Protestant direction toward Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, the OP video being a blatant example of such.

What's your take on that?

Didn't watch the video, but suspect that the issue is requiring works for justification. . .the issue Paul was most adamant about.

Saint Steven · Jan 23, 2021

mkgal1 said:
"Religious right" may be a clearer title. This article is older.....but helps to describe the overall goals of the Religious Right:

Religious Right groups have a specific set of goals for American life. They speak openly of “taking back” America, of asserting control over the lives of every single citizen. They have an agenda, and they want action on it.

None of this is a secret. Religious Right organizations brag about what they hope to achieve on their Web sites and in their publications. They hold national meetings and conventions to plot strategy. Their leaders issue marching orders to millions of American followers over radio, television and the Internet.

Yet many Americans remain unaware of the scope of the power, money and aspirations of the Religious Right – or how radical its goals are. More than 25 years have passed since a band of conservative strategists convinced the Rev. Jerry Falwell to lead the Moral Majority, and the movement is today at the apex of its political power.

The reign of Bush, the first president truly wedded to the Religious Right’s agenda, has focused new attention on the movement. This special issue of Church & State takes a look at the goals of the Religious Right, its structure and its major players.

Americans United has monitored the Religious Right since the movement’s genesis with the rise of Falwell in 1979. AU staffers read Religious Right publications and monitor group Web sites, radio and television broadcasts as well as other media. AU staff members also frequently attend Religious Right gatherings to get an insider’s view of the movement. This approach gives AU a unique perspective that few outsiders can match.

The information AU has compiled provides a compelling counterpoint to claims of a “war on Christians” in American society. According to AU’s analysis, the nation’s top ten Religious Right groups are hardly persecuted. They raked in nearly half a billion dollars collectively. (Some organizational budget figures are from 2004, and some are from 2005. The collective total is $447,368,625.) These groups are well organized, well funded and have specific policy goals.

Republican leaders in Washington are so obsessed with keeping the Religious Right happy that they have established a “Values Action Team” in the House headed by U.S. Rep. Joseph Pitts (R-Pa.) and a Senate version headed by U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.). The units serve as special liaisons between Congress and the Religious Right. Far from being relegated to the back of the public policy bus, Religious Right lobbyists are often sitting in the driver’s seat.

The Religious Right has grown so powerful it enjoys a veto over many national Republican candidates. Any Republican who aspires to the presidency must first get a blessing from the Religious Right. ~ The Religious Right And American Freedom

2014- The Real Origins of the Religious Right

In more recent history, Donald Trump had a majority of his support coming from Evangelicals, if the polls were correct. And we probably haven't heard the end from these folks. There is talk of a third major political party being formed under the leadership of Donald Trump who has vowed to return, to the White House, I assume.

Jesus is YHWH · Jan 23, 2021

chevyontheriver said:
Either MacArthur is correct or he's not. Was he correct?

Mac is correct that salvation is faith apart from works.

Clare73 · Jan 23, 2021

2PhiloVoid said:
Well, I empathize with you in what you're drawing out in your OP, Brother Steven. I think it's unfortunate that the term itself gets claimed by an assortment of both Protestants and some Catholics, because it then becomes an equivocal term that sometimes causes others to surmise that everyone else who identifies with it thinks the same way.

I'm sure that there are some other lifeforms under that same rock, but it might take a magnifying glass by which to spot them and differentiate them. From the sources I have,

I think it's best to just keep in mind that there's a range of meanings on a spectrum for "Evangelicalism." Not all of them are as stiff as MacArthur's is.

I mean, I don't know. Maybe it's time to ditch the term since it's not conducive to clarity any longer?

And how long do you give it before the new term suffers the same malady?

Saint Steven · Jan 23, 2021

Jesus is YHWH said:
Well Mac is correct we are not saved by faith plus works that is heretical. We are saved by faith alone apart from the works of the law. Good works are the result of Salvation not the means of salvation which is by grace through faith as per Ephesians 2:8-10.

hope this helps !!!

But it appears that Mac was making a false accusation against Eastern Orthodoxy. Hank made that very clear.

mlepfitjw · Jan 23, 2021

Steven, the work of God is to believe on the one whom was sent. Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, when believe he works in us to love. That is the works mentioned in James. Is faith without works dead? You can look at it as this: Is faith without love dead? Yes of course it is.

2PhiloVoid · Jan 23, 2021

Clare73 said:
And how long do you think it will take before the new term suffers the same malady?

Which term would that be, Sister Clare?

Saint Steven · Jan 23, 2021

Jesus is YHWH said:
The two of them need to sit down and discuss this together and openly. Just like on a forum sometimes we can talk past one another which seems to be the case in this video.

Mac was calling Evangelicals to "curse" Eastern Orthodoxy. If anything, an apology is in order.

Lawrence87 · Jan 23, 2021

Saint Steven said:
But I don't recall ever hearing a Catholic, or Eastern Orthodox leader declaring Protestantism a false religion. But that happens from the Protestant direction toward Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, the OP video being a blatant example of such.

As an Orthodox Christian, I will say that we do have our fair share of people including clergymen who will gleefully call Protestants heretics and condemn them. The guy in the video was civil enough, but I know from experience that we have our share of people who wouldn't hesitate to say similar things in regard to Evangelicalism as was said towards Orthodoxy by MacArthur. I think it's just something you get with people... I wouldn't wish for you to have a skewed perspective, we have our share of people who want to condemn everything as demonic heresy.

Personally I think as Christians we are called not to judge others, and way too many people seem to overlook that.

Clare73 · Jan 23, 2021

hedrick said:
Interesting quotes. All are in fact about acceptance and love.

In Mat 18:4-9 it's acceptance of trusting children, and a warning about those who put roadblocks in front of those who trust in God.

Mat 23:13 ff is again about those who put roadblocks in front of those who would follow Jesus. In this case it's the Pharisees, known for rejecting people who didn't follow their elaborations on Biblical requirements.

Gal 1:8 and 5:12 criticize those oppose Paul's Gospel of grace. In this context it's adding legalistic requirements.

I'm thinkin' the ones who get the millstones around their necks and all the righteous blood upon them that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zecariah son of Berekiah, might be seein' it differently.

Just sayin'. . .
.

Is Evangelicalism a false religion?

Blood-bought

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

You can call me Steve

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Blood-bought

Blood-bought

Other scholars got to me before you did!

Blood-bought

You can call me Steve

my Lord and my God !

Blood-bought

You can call me Steve

May you be blessed!

Other scholars got to me before you did!

You can call me Steve

Active Member

Blood-bought

Similar threads