John MacArthur Takes on… Todd Rhoades?!!??
- Posted by: Todd
- Posted on: Sun, April 22, 2007
- Viewed 585
- (62) comments so far
OK… John MacArthur really doesn’t take me on… as a matter of fact, it’s pretty obvious that he’s not the slightest clue in the world who I am… it’s more a discussion of his new book, and, mostly, his view of Mark Driscoll.
Here’s short transcript of the exchange, along with a link to the audio version (it’s about 1/3 of the way into the interview):
PE: ...Todd Rhoades seems to be coming to the defense of what you had to say about Mark Driscoll. He says, “Just a question… I’m assuming here that ‘grunge’ people need Jesus. (I hope I’m correct). Who will better reach them? Mark Driscoll or John MacArthur? Let’s take it a step further… who IS currently reaching them? Driscoll or MacArthur?” Then he concludes by saying, “All I’m saying is… John, man…”, he’s talking directly to you. I don’t know if you’ve read this, Dr. MacArthur…JM: No, I haven’t. What’s his name again?
PE: His name is Todd Rhoades.
JM: OK
PE: MondayMorningInsight. I would never call you John as he’s doing, so please understand…
JM: No, please do.
PE: On, no, no, no… I’m just quoting from him… saying, “All I’m saying is, John, man… don’t make me choose. Why does it have to be an either/or?” He says, “You work at the work God has given you; and let Mark reach the people God hasn’t gifted you in reaching. And if a word slips out here or there, and yet a few more people make it into the Kingdom, I can accept that.” How do you respond to that?
JM: Well, the issue that I tried to point out in what I wrote in “Grunge Christianity” and also in the book, is, do we think our technique gets people saved? Do we think that cussing in the pulpit or being crude, or celebrating drinking beer somehow accesses people into the Kingdom of God? That NOT doing that isn’t going to reach? Those are not the issues. But the issue with me is, you can’t say that because the culture does certain things that I’m going to do them because that’s how I reach them. In so doing, you ignore the whole issue of sanctification. What I’m trying to say in regards to Driscoll in particular… I agree with his doctrine of Justification, but in that style of ministry, you can’t get from that doctrine of Justification to a Biblical doctrine of Sanctification. What you do is you create an environment where people can have reformed Soteriology and keep living the way they want. When you know every episode of South Park and every R Rated movie, and, you know, when you’re fast and loose with the language; and the things he even said in his book “Confessions of a Missional Pastor” to a guy in the middle of the night who was caught up in pornography are just so outrageous that you just ask if there’s any understanding at all, if there’s sense at all of Sanctification; a deep commitment to Holiness, and not a flaunting of liberty, sort of, in-your-face, I don’t care what you think, this is what I’m gonna do mentality; which I don’t think Godly and humble people tend to do.
PE: What do you make of this writer, this Todd Rhoades, trying to justify Mark Driscoll’s mode of ministry based on the fact that he’s reaching people that John MacArthur can’t reach visa vie that you would never do the things that Mark Driscoll is doing?
JM: Well, the answer to that question is that what I do or what he does doesn’t reach people. What reaches people is the Word of God and the work of the Holy Spirit. I am convinced that if Mark Driscoll; he’s a gifted enough communicator, believe me; if Mark Driscoll conducted himself differently and preached the gospel and preached holiness and Godly life and demonstrated humility, he’d have a church at least the size, if not larger than what he has. I think it’s a misunderstanding to think that’s why they’re there.
Hey, John (CAN I call you John?)… I’m really not that bad a guy… I’m a Cedarville grad, for crying out loud. I think Mark Driscoll would love to respond about his view of Sanctification; I’m just thinking that the process and end result of Sanctification might look a little different to Mark than it does to John.
I mean no disrespect to JM… I think he’s a great guy that God is using in many ways. The problem lies here: I think the same of Mark Driscoll.
For what it’s worth…
FOR DISCUSSION: Any thoughts on MacArthur’s response?
Huh?! I just found this link to MMI from the radio show of Paul Edwards. Paul has a daily talk show on WLQV of Detroit. On Tuesday of this week, he had as his guest, John MacArthur. He then proceeded to quote ME from a posting here at MMI and ask MacArthur to respond.
Comments
if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.
SLW on Thu, April 19, 2007
Todd:
Don’t you think much of what is dubbed theological debate is nothing more than the sound and fury of argumentive people, egotistically trying to make other people choose a side when no choice needs to be made? The Galatian situation (6:13) all over again.
Todd Rhoades on Thu, April 19, 2007
As long as you’re not categorizing me as one of the ‘argumentative people’, sure. My point, extactly, is that Johnny Mac whould do what God’s called Johnny Mac to do; all the while allowing Mark Driscoll the liberty to do what he feels God’s called him to. I think that’s a nice start.
Todd
Leonard on Thu, April 19, 2007
Without retrying the original post, this might be one of the most pivotal statements yet as to the divide. “…you can’t get from that doctrine of Justification to a Biblical doctrine of Sanctification.” Mac does not believe you can reach sanctification using the methods of Driscoll. My problem here is that justification is a place or at least something that happens at a time and place, sanctification is a process. When Mactheknife says you can’t get from one doctrine to another doctrine I think a whole bunch of worms crawl out as to how he sees doctrine, especially his understanding of doctrine. .
Mark Broadbent on Thu, April 19, 2007
Recently read this statement by JM on Christian Rock Music..
“one of the things that I just can’t comprehend in “Rock” music is to take profundity and trivialize it with the kind of music that is trivial. Or worse (I guess) is to take profound lyrics and profound theology and put them to cheap musical style, that is not lofty in terms of it’s musicianship; it’s not lofty in its terms of its ability to comprehend music as such”
(http://www.biblebb.com/files/mac/godmusic.htm)
Seriously the guy has no idea of the principles taught in Acts 17. Todd you are way too nice!!! Somewhere along the way, he appointed himself to be the theological policeman of the whole world.
Andy Sikora on Thu, April 19, 2007
WOW TODD! Who would have thought you’d be at the center of all this (even if it’s purely by chance, and mostly not about you at all). My question for you is what did you ever do to Paul Edwards for him to try and get you beat down by Johnny Mac (if calling him John is seen as disrespectful I’m sure he’d love being called Johnny Mac)?
What I liked best about this is seeing someone go after Driscoll for seemingly petty issues in the same way that Driscoll goes after others. HA! That’s priceless!
Andy Sikora on Thu, April 19, 2007
While I was commenting Mark Broadbent posted his comment about Johnny Mac thinking he’s the theological policeman of the world, but that’s exactly who Driscoll thinks he is. I think we may be looking at a showdown over position (both theological and on the Force). Sorry for the double comment.
chris g on Thu, April 19, 2007
cedarville huh? my sis and bro in-law are alum. lots of changes there. enjoy yer blog.
Kent on Fri, April 20, 2007
“My point, extactly, is that Johnny Mac whould do what God’s called Johnny Mac to do; all the while allowing Mark Driscoll the liberty to do what he feels God’s called him to”
Liberty to serve God yes, but liberty to be vulgar? Nah, don’t think so.
bishopdave on Fri, April 20, 2007
Wow. We’re brushing up against greatness here! Cool.
I agree with you Todd. I don’t listen to Driscoll regularly but the 8 or 10 sermons I’ve downloaded the worst I’ve heard him say is a vulgar term for flatulence. You’re exactly right—Mac & Mark have two different audiences. Paul went one way, Barnabas went another. And, Mac sounds goofy in saying you can’t get to sanctification with that kind of justification. Goofy.
Josh R on Fri, April 20, 2007
I am pretty sure I have listened to over 50 hours of Driscoll sermons, and I still have yet to hear him do anything I would call cussing.
In his attempts to make clear the idiotic nature of this culture’s thinking, he does occasionally say some things that are somewhat politically incorrect. I think he is actually quite humble in admitting that he says some things that he shouldn’t say, and sometimes he says things that he should say, but in a way he shouldn’t have said them.
Has anyone except Donald Miller ever heard Driscoll cuss? Mark’s recollection of his encounter with Miller that got him that nickname was that something was said in a restaurant, not the pulpit.
It is always a thrill when somebody famous asks “What’s his name again” about you. http://www.mondaymorninginsight.com/images/smileys/wink.gif
Dan B on Fri, April 20, 2007
Just to echo what the last few have said, in everything I’ve ever heard and read from Mark, I’ve never heard him use any words that I would consider cussing.
Honestly, I’m a pastor and most of the words he uses that Jonny Mac has a problem with, I use every day, just not from the pulpit. I’m not sure if that makes me a hypocrite for speaking differently in my daily life that I do from the pulpit or wise for knowing what type of language is appropriate in which setting.
Stewart on Fri, April 20, 2007
In my opinion John Mac is a cultural elitist. Sorry. Just how I’m calling it. I think ministry needs to oppose vulgarity. But to be incarnational (which I think is a very good thing) we must be concerned with what is vulger in the culture we minister to. So what would have ruffled feathers in Victorian England is different that in JM’s congregation is different than in MD’s congregation.
A couple of readers have said they’ve never heard MD cuss in the pulpit. I’ve listened to a number of his sermons too. I’ve never heard anything I thought was out of line. But I’m in my early 30s. If I gave the same sermons to my grandmother - she’s think they were obscene. And if she knew how to blog or anyone cared to interview her - she’d tell you he was obscene in a sermon.
JM’s not my grandmother’s age. But I have found in dealing with people from his generation, they have a different view of what constitutes “reverence”. I think I agree with Todd. We need to leave each other alone (even encourage one another) to do the ministry God calls us to. The more disturbing questions it raises to me are things like: Is cross generational ministry really possible? Is multi-cultural ministry really possible? If we are all so offended by one another’s way of expressing… how can we worship together without ending up with pathetic watered down communication style which bores everyone to tears?
Carole Turner on Sat, April 21, 2007
Man you are so famous!!
I think I only like 10% of what Driscoll says (that I have read or heard) and Mac Arthur is just way to old school for me so I don’t even have him on my radar.
Peter Hamm on Sun, April 22, 2007
Doctrine Schmoctrine.
no seriously… people read way too much theology into the Bible sometime. Are you saved by what you believe or who you trust? Is the Holy Spirit big enough to guide believers into all truth without having the theology police dictate exactly what one is to believe as if they have a better understanding of the Bible than anybody else who’s ever lived? Sheesh…
Linda on Sun, April 22, 2007
Josh R made the comment:
“I am pretty sure I have listened to over 50 hours of Driscoll sermons, and I still have yet to hear him do anything I would call cussing.’
Great point!
Page 1 of 5 pages 1 2 3 > Last »
Post a Comment