John MacArthur's Hypocrisy and Pragmatism

The Pharisees were known for being hypocrites. "Do as I say, not as I do" described them and all hypocrites. They have a double standard: one for themselves and one for everyone else. They do this in the name of God. Yet the God of Scripture is far from hypocrisy. He is the impartial Judge; perfectly righteous and holy. He judges all people to the one perfect standard: Himself. God holds those who teach His Word, to a stricter judgment as well, because they do so under His Name:

Jas 3:1  Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we shall incur a stricter judgment. 

So when someone like John MacArthur starts writing his opinions on social justice, I have to point out his own hypocrisy and that of his church and ministry (which are all intertwined).

In his message on social justice (the staffer running GTY's website has broken it down into installments, so I'm referring to the second part), he states:

Evangelicals as a group have shown an unsettling willingness to compromise or unnecessarily obfuscate all kinds of issues where Scripture has spoken plainly and without ambiguity.

For example, despite the clarity of 1 Timothy 2:12 (“I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man”), leading evangelicals have been debating for several years whether women qualify to be elders or pastors in the church. Many capitulate to cultural preference rather than submitting to biblical authority on this and other similar issues. Some have tried to redefine the role and proper functioning of the family. Others seem to want to deconstruct—or simply ignore—what the Bible says about divorce and remarriage.

More disturbing yet, over the past few years some evangelicals have begun to borrow moral rationalizations from secular culture in the wake of America’s sexual revolution. For years there has been a slow but steady softening of evangelicals’ stance against sex outside of marriage. More recently, and more ominously, several vocal evangelicals (including some in positions of leadership or influence) have been tinkering with novel ideas regarding gender fluidity, sexual orientation, transgenderism, and homosexual marriage. Those are issues that generations of believers would never have dreamed of putting on the table for debate or redefinition in the church. But at this very moment there is a burgeoning campaign to reconsider and abandon the church’s historic stance on LGBT issues under the banner of “social justice.”

End quote.

That he begins with showing the earlier problem of feminism within the churches, is where we need to stop. Why? Because even with the first problem he's being a hypocrite.

His own seminary is connected directly with a church in Virginia that is feministic. This church is now led by a former pastor from MacArthur's own church, Grace Community Church, Jesse Johnson. Johnson is the dean at this extension of TMS, and was an adjunct professor at the California campus. Also, he occasionally writes for "Crippledgate" and is active on Twitter as well. 

Here's what Johnson's church states regarding women's roles of teaching men in his church's handbook on the topic p.8 in the handbook, p. 12 in pdf page count:

Quote:

"Missionaries We believe that men and women in missionary service should follow the mandates of the Scriptures as churches are established. Missionaries receiving support from Immanuel Bible Church shall be guided by the Scriptures concerning the roles of men and women in the church as they respond to diverse cultural and ethnic differences. Women in missionary service may find themselves in situations requiring them to assume teaching and leadership roles normally reserved for men. This typically occurs where no qualified men are available. Once a church has been established and qualified men become available, they shall assume leadership roles.   

End quote.

And MacArthur dares to call out the pragmatism and violation of Scripture within Evangelicalism? Do as I say, not as I do.

MacArthur states:

"The common link in those continual compromises is pragmatism*, driven by a desire to reach the world and win its support and admiration by utilitarian means....

Today it has penetrated deep into the culture of the church, and the end effect is disaster.

Every one of those deviations from sound gospel doctrine has been driven and advanced by evangelicals seeking acceptance in the broader culture. Some of the errors I have singled out (seeker sensitivity and the explosive growth of the charismatic movement) have been promoted by evangelicals who think that whatever attracts the world must be the right doctrine or strategy....

*Pragmatism, quite simply, is the notion that the truthfulness or value of any strategy, idea, or truth claim is determined by its practical results. If a tactic produces the desired effect, it is deemed good. In the realm of church growth and gospel ministry, pragmatism as a guiding philosophy is severely flawed—even dangerously detrimental—for a couple of reasons that should be fairly obvious.

Number one, pragmatism alone cannot define what “the desired result” ought to be. If the goal is bad and the strategy works, it’s a bad strategy. In fact, if the desired end is evil, the strategy used to achieve it is by definition evil.

Second, and more to the point, raw pragmatism is unbiblical. God’s Word itself is the only reliable test of how good or bad anything is.

End quote. (bold, red, my emphasis)

I have dealt with the issue of women teaching men here. Besides the real issue of actually trusting in God's absolute sovereignty to save by His designated ways we find in Scripture, the fundamental issue without view to culture is this:

1Tim. 2: 11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

This is not merely inside a church building. This is a fundamental issue of women teaching men spiritually (the same issue remains inside marriage--women aren't to be leaders of their homes, either). What is a missionary on the field, but one who is preaching the Gospel to men and women, and then making disciples and thus discipling them in the doctrines in Scripture? Yet what does Jesse Johnson's church, Immanuel Bible Church state?  While claiming "We believe that men and women in missionary service should follow the mandates of the Scriptures as churches are established" they then teaching and practice against it with their pragmatism: "Women in missionary service may find themselves in situations requiring them to assume teaching and leadership roles normally reserved for men. This typically occurs where no qualified men are available. Once a church has been established and qualified men become available, they shall assume leadership roles. " There is the abject and glaring hypocrisy. Giving lip service to biblical doctrine (and therefore demonstrating that sound, biblical doctrine is merely an optional view, not absolute truth that MUST be obeyed), they then turn right around and teach a practice that is contrary to it. This is the pragmatism MacArthur dares to point out about "out there", but not within his own circle. 

Another example of MacArthur's hypocrisy is that he continues to pulpit fellowship with social justice/liberation theology/pro-"Christian" homosexual feminists like Tim Keller, John Piper , and Ravi Zacharias:

As I believe that he wrote his article series in one complete message and it was likely done weeks ago, there should have been action following his message where he's the first to do what he has purportedly taught (why this wasn't done years ago is beyond me as he has taught about gender roles for Christians over the last 32 years, shows another problem).  In other words, God requires impartiality and integrity to be displayed by Bible teachers and that requires cleaning his own house first before decrying that same problem abroad (Matt. 5 is extensive on this). This would mean MacArthur not only cancels his teaching at the Getty's Sing! 2018, but also his association with both T4G and TGC (as both have leaders/speakers that intertwine) and publicly explain why. Otherwise MacArthur's finger pointing and seemingly disheartened feelings of the broad sweep of pragmatism and error is just empty and hallow, because let's face it, his own ministry is also perpetrating this very same thing (there are other issues that GCC/TMS has done that reflect the pragmatic seeker-sensitive model he decries, but that might be something I'll write about at another time).  

Jas 2:1  My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. 

Jas 2:9  But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 

Pro 24:23  These also are sayings of the wise. To show partiality in judgment is not good. 

Gal 2:4  But it was because of the false brethren who had sneaked in to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage. 5  But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you. 6  But from those who were of high reputation (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)--well, those who were of reputation contributed nothing to me. 

1Ti 5:21  I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality.

2Jn 1:9  Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son. 10  If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting; 11  for the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds.