Is John Mcarthur guilty of heresy?

[Neostarwcc]

I don't know if you're all familiar with John Mcarthur but he is a reformed theologian that is the leader of the mega church Grace Community church. This might be news to some of you and many of you probably know this already but John Mcarthur may be guilty of heresy by denying that Mary is the mother of God.

I know when he made this statement he was trying to be as anti catholic as possible (in fact he denies that Catholics are even saved in the first place even though they hold to the nicene creed like every other true mainline Christian Denomination.)

But anyway, by saying that Mary is not the mother of God is he guilty of heresy? Since historically the Christian church holds to the fact that Mary WAS the mother of God because Jesus is the son of God and Mary was his mother.

So him openly denying that Mary was the mother of God means that be doesn't believe that Jesus is divine. Because if Mary carried a half human half God baby In her womb than, she definitely is the mother of God. There's nothing Catholic about it it's a fact.

Thoughts? Can you think of other heresies Mcarthur might be openly teaching? If he doesn't repent I feel bad for him.

Audio of his claims Exposing the Idolatry of Mary Worship: An Overview

 

[Blade]

First I like what this man of God who is home now about Catholics "can't they be wrong about Mary but right about Jesus?"

As for John MacArthur if we look at it how he talks about it "Catholics genuinely believe they are saved by doing good, confessing sin, and observing ceremonies". Now anyone that believes they are saved by works only yet do not believe in Christ that died on the cross are not saved.

I just watched a video about him talking about this. If you understand how he is saying it. Hmm ok your in heaven is Mary the mother of Jesus? He's saying at some point here that stopped no? Woman what have I do with you, woman behold your son.. things like this is what John was talking about. Not that Mary was not the mother when he was born or even growing up. It to him stopped at some point where she is no longer his mother. Christ has no mother unless we stay here on earth. What He was before is what He has always been He is GOD He has no mother. Do you understand? Not saying I agree on all this but its not heresy.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I don't know if you're all familiar with John Mcarthur but he is a reformed theologian that is the leader of the mega church Grace Community church. This might be news to some of you and many of you probably know this already but John Mcarthur may be guilty of heresy by denying that Mary is the mother of God.

I know when he made this statement he was trying to be as anti catholic as possible (in fact he denies that Catholics are even saved in the first place even though they hold to the nicene creed like every other true mainline Christian Denomination.)

But anyway, by saying that Mary is not the mother of God is he guilty of heresy? Since historically the Christian church holds to the fact that Mary WAS the mother of God because Jesus is the son of God and Mary was his mother.

So him openly denying that Mary was the mother of God means that be doesn't believe that Jesus is divine. Because if Mary carried a half human half God baby In her womb than, she definitely is the mother of God. There's nothing Catholic about it it's a fact.

Thoughts? Can you think of other heresies Mcarthur might be openly teaching? If he doesn't repent I feel bad for him.

Citation? Link?

 

[Neostarwcc]

Citation? Link?

It's a welknown quote of his. I couldn't find a video but I found audio and a picture of him being quoted. Exposing the Idolatry of Mary Worship: An Overview

 

[chevyontheriver]

I don't know if you're all familiar with John Mcarthur but he is a reformed theologian that is the leader of the mega church Grace Community church. This might be news to some of you and many of you probably know this already but John Mcarthur may be guilty of heresy by denying that Mary is the mother of God.

I know when he made this statement he was trying to be as anti catholic as possible (in fact he denies that Catholics are even saved in the first place even though they hold to the nicene creed like every other true mainline Christian Denomination.)

But anyway, by saying that Mary is not the mother of God is he guilty of heresy? Since historically the Christian church holds to the fact that Mary WAS the mother of God because Jesus is the son of God and Mary was his mother.

So him openly denying that Mary was the mother of God means that be doesn't believe that Jesus is divine. Because if Mary carried a half human half God baby In her womb than, she definitely is the mother of God. There's nothing Catholic about it it's a fact.

Thoughts? Can you think of other heresies Mcarthur might be openly teaching? If he doesn't repent I feel bad for him.

One thing I would like to gently correct you on is that Mary did not have a half-human baby. That baby was fully human and at the very same time fully divine. No halfsies about it at all. Jesus was and is a divine person who is at the same time as much human as you or I, differing ONLY in that He did not sin. He had a human soul and a human intellect and a human will. If He didn't then our souls and intellects and wills would not have been redeemed. That too is Catholic teaching. You can find it summarized in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and in good theology textbooks.

As to John McArthur, I have no idea what he specifically believes, but it looks like he is an example of how anti-Catholics can get into trouble when their anti-Catholicism overrides their understanding of the Bible. How far has he entered into the trap of Nestorius? I have no idea and I'm not the one who adjudicates these things thankfully.

 

[Mark Quayle]

It's a welknown quote of his. I couldn't find a video but I found audio and a picture of him being quoted. Exposing the Idolatry of Mary Worship: An Overview

I'm sorry. What is the problem with that? He's making a point. God cannot be born nor die nor be created nor be subject to anything outside of himself. He has no beginning and no end.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I'm sorry. What is the problem with that? He's making a point. God cannot be born nor die nor be created nor be subject to anything outside of himself. He has no beginning and no end.

The 'problem' with that is that it is obtuse. It presumes that Catholic doctrine has it that Mary originated God from before time. As if ANY Catholic (or Orthodox, or Lutheran for that matter) would ever even think that.

The contrary syllogism is that Jesus is God. Jesus had a real physical human mother. Therefore Mary was the mother of the human Jesus who was fully God.

If she was NOT the mother of God then Jesus was not God at the time of his human conception or at the time of his human birth. Maybe he 'became a god' later on, but that Jesus at his birth was only a human being. You see, Mary being the mother of God IS a Christological dogma first and only secondarily and in a derived way is it a Mariological dogma.

 

[PloverWing]

But anyway, by saying that Mary is not the mother of God is he guilty of heresy?

I'm guessing that he's not thinking clearly enough on this to be guilty of genuine heresy. His education should have covered the Chalcedonian Definition and its background (or, for goodness' sake, there's Google), but maybe the early church's Christological debates aren't something he's thought deeply about. I don't think MacArthur intends to be Arian or Nestorian. I think he's just gotten carried away with being anti-Catholic. (He may not realize that he's also being anti-Orthodox, and even anti-Traditional-Protestant, for that matter.)

The title "θεοτόκος", especially in its English rendering "mother of God", is a shocking-sounding title. It sounds like it means that the uncreated God had a beginning. It does not mean that. It means that Jesus was God Incarnate, and when Mary carried and gave birth to him, she was giving birth to God Incarnate. MacArthur's dislike of Catholics may be interfering with his ability to listen carefully to what Chalcedon was expressing.

I don't know enough about MacArthur to comment on him in any detail; he's not a preacher I've ever sought out. As I skim his Wikipedia page, I see that he believes a number of things I disagree with, but he seems to fit pretty well into that particular strand of American Protestantism that's influenced by Dispensationalism, Fundamentalism, and a bit of Reformed theology.

 

[Mark Quayle]

The 'problem' with that is that it is obtuse. It presumes that Catholic doctrine has it that Mary originated God from before time. As if ANY Catholic (or Orthodox, or Lutheran for that matter) would ever even think that.

The contrary syllogism is that Jesus is God. Jesus had a real physical human mother. Therefore Mary was the mother of the human Jesus who was fully God.

If she was NOT the mother of God then Jesus was not God at the time of his human conception or at the time of his human birth. Maybe he 'became a god' later on, but that Jesus at his birth was only a human being. You see, Mary being the mother of God IS a Christological dogma first and only secondarily and in a derived way is it a Mariological dogma.

So why do they say, "Mother of God", if they admit she was only the mother of the man Jesus, who was also God? And, by the way, don't pretend that this has not misled a bunch of people into Mary-worship.

 

[High Fidelity]

He isn’t saying that she isn’t His mother; rather she isn’t responsible or the creator of Jesus, and shouldn’t be elevated as such.

Praying to Mary is a pointless endeavour, as is to the so-called saints. No one comes to the Father except through Me. Not via Mary, not via Saint Joe of Idolatry, not via Father Richard in confession.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I don't know if you're all familiar with John Mcarthur but he is a reformed theologian that is the leader of the mega church Grace Community church. This might be news to some of you and many of you probably know this already but John Mcarthur may be guilty of heresy by denying that Mary is the mother of God.

John McArthur teaches heresy but that need not make him a heretic. Heresy is to follow one's own opinions and judgements even when they are contrary to those taught by the Church. John McArthur appears to be following the teaching of his denomination. But those teachings are partly heretical from a Catholic perspective and I am persuaded that Catholic teaching is true so from my perspective he teaches heresy for the reason I just gave.

 

[HTacianas]

I don't know if you're all familiar with John Mcarthur but he is a reformed theologian that is the leader of the mega church Grace Community church. This might be news to some of you and many of you probably know this already but John Mcarthur may be guilty of heresy by denying that Mary is the mother of God.

I know when he made this statement he was trying to be as anti catholic as possible (in fact he denies that Catholics are even saved in the first place even though they hold to the nicene creed like every other true mainline Christian Denomination.)

But anyway, by saying that Mary is not the mother of God is he guilty of heresy? Since historically the Christian church holds to the fact that Mary WAS the mother of God because Jesus is the son of God and Mary was his mother.

So him openly denying that Mary was the mother of God means that be doesn't believe that Jesus is divine. Because if Mary carried a half human half God baby In her womb than, she definitely is the mother of God. There's nothing Catholic about it it's a fact.

Thoughts? Can you think of other heresies Mcarthur might be openly teaching? If he doesn't repent I feel bad for him.

As far as heresy goes, after seeing some of his work his opinions on Mary are the least of his problems.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

And, by the way, don't pretend that this has not misled a bunch of people into Mary-worship.

Who, specifically, worships Mary [as God]?

 

[St_Worm2]

Symbol of Chalcedon
We, then, following the holy fathers, all with one consent teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a rational soul and body; coessential with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the mother of God, according to the manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one person and one subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ; as the prophets from the beginning have declared concerning Him, and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself has taught us, and the creed of the holy fathers has handed down to us.

Perhaps the principal purpose of Chalcedon was to combat the heresies of Nestorius, and also Eutyches. This Creed sought to correct their errors (concerning the true nature of the Lord Jesus Christ), ~not~ to elevate the status of Mary, but unfortunately, that's what happens whenever the phrase, "Theotokos"/"Mary, the mother of God", is used by itself. Almost all of the focus is placed upon Mary.

Whenever that word/phrase is read as part of the Creed instead, this doesn't happen. Quite frankly, even if "Theotokos" (whenever it is spoken/written/sung) simply included the qualifying phrase from the Creed, "according to the manhood", it would take the emphasis off of Mary and put it back onto her Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, where the Creed clearly intends it to be.

--David

 

[concretecamper]

I see the Nestorianism heresy is alive and well.

 

[concretecamper]

As for John MacArthur if we look at it how he talks about it "Catholics genuinely believe they are saved by doing good, confessing sin, and observing ceremonies". Now anyone that believes they are saved by works only yet do not believe in Christ that died on the cross are not saved.

Please brush up on what the Church teaches before you post any more silly incorrect statements.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Who, specifically, worships Mary [as God]?

Like I said, don't pretend.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

One thing I would like to gently correct you on is that Mary did not have a half-human baby. That baby was fully human and at the very same time fully divine. No halfsies about it at all. Jesus was and is a divine person who is at the same time as much human as you or I, differing ONLY in that He did not sin. He had a human soul and a human intellect and a human will. If He didn't then our souls and intellects and wills would not have been redeemed. That too is Catholic teaching. You can find it summarized in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and in good theology textbooks.

As to John McArthur, I have no idea what he specifically believes, but it looks like he is an example of how anti-Catholics can get into trouble when their anti-Catholicism overrides their understanding of the Bible. How far has he entered into the trap of Nestorius? I have no idea and I'm not the one who adjudicates these things thankfully.

Let's read some history:

The title "Mother of God" (Greek: Θεοτόκος, Theotokos) was first used by the Church of Alexandria in the 4th century, and was officially adopted by the Catholic Church at the Council of Ephesus in 431. The council was convened to address the Nestorian controversy, which was a disagreement about the nature of Jesus Christ. Nestorius, the patriarch of Constantinople, argued that Jesus had two separate natures, one human and one divine. The council rejected Nestorius's teaching, and affirmed that Jesus had a single, divine nature. The council also affirmed that Mary was the Mother of God, because she gave birth to Jesus, who is God.

So now that we know why she was given the title " mother of God", what derived out of this title?

1) Her immaculate conception in 1854 by Pope Pius IX. Mary, the mother of God was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, saved from all stain of original sin.
2) The doctrine of the Assumption of Mary 1950 by Pope Pius XII stating that "the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever-Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.
3) The doctrine sanctioned in 1954 by Pope Pius XII officially declaring Mary to be "Queen of Heaven ".

None of these doctrines are scriptural sound. This is why John MacArthur rebukes her title.

Blessings

 

[BNR32FAN]

I don't know if you're all familiar with John Mcarthur but he is a reformed theologian that is the leader of the mega church Grace Community church. This might be news to some of you and many of you probably know this already but John Mcarthur may be guilty of heresy by denying that Mary is the mother of God.

I know when he made this statement he was trying to be as anti catholic as possible (in fact he denies that Catholics are even saved in the first place even though they hold to the nicene creed like every other true mainline Christian Denomination.)

But anyway, by saying that Mary is not the mother of God is he guilty of heresy? Since historically the Christian church holds to the fact that Mary WAS the mother of God because Jesus is the son of God and Mary was his mother.

So him openly denying that Mary was the mother of God means that be doesn't believe that Jesus is divine. Because if Mary carried a half human half God baby In her womb than, she definitely is the mother of God. There's nothing Catholic about it it's a fact.

Thoughts? Can you think of other heresies Mcarthur might be openly teaching? If he doesn't repent I feel bad for him.

Could you provide a quote from him on this topic?

 

[concretecamper]

The title "Mother of God" (Greek: Θεοτόκος, Theotokos) was first used by the Church of Alexandria in the 4th century, and was officially adopted by the Catholic Church at the Council of Ephesus in 431. The council was convened to address the Nestorian controversy, which was a disagreement about the nature of Jesus Christ. Nestorius, the patriarch of Constantinople, argued that Jesus had two separate natures, one human and one divine. The council rejected Nestorius's teaching, and affirmed that Jesus had a single, divine nature. The council also affirmed that Mary was the Mother of God, because she gave birth to Jesus, who is God.

Yes, we all know this already. You should teach your protestant brothers and sister this as many reject Mary's title "Mother of God"

1) Her immaculate conception in 1854 by Pope Pius IX. Mary, the mother of God was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, saved from all stain of original sin.
2) The doctrine of the Assumption of Mary 1950 by Pope Pius XII stating that "the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever-Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.
3) The doctrine sanctioned in 1954 by Pope Pius XII officially declaring Mary to be "Queen of Heaven ".

Has nothing to do with this thread.