Ever hear of John MacArthur? He is a particularly hostile Protestant.

[Roman_Catholic_1]

I have shown you a strong example of his integrity not to misrepresent, by his asking Catholic Priests and Apologists if the things he said concerning their devotion to Mary were correct. They affirmed that he is correct.

MacArthur says that Catholics offer adoration to Mary… Surely even you know this is not correct right?

Worship:

Evangelical doctrine teaches that our triune God alone is worthy of worship, the sole audience of our prayers, and the only object of our praise and adoration.

Catholic doctrine encourages prayers and **adoration **offered to Mary and other saints.

eternallifeministries.org/jm_ect.htm

Sorry if you guys already discussed this. I havent been following the thread but I noticed this last one where you said he doesnt misrepresent Catholic beliefs on Mary… I would say that saying we offer adoration to Mary is misrepresenting our devotion to the BVM. wouldnt you? I am not going to say he did this on purpose, but he is mistaken here.

 

[Church_Militant]

This is a great country we live in CM, and I am a decorated Navy combat veteran who served on the rivers of South Viet Nam; I served to preserve the right of you, and John MacArthur to freely speak to issues that concern them, or not to speak at all. He, as you, can speak for, or against, whatever he chooses.

And this is relevent how? Your patriotism is not at issue here…why smokescreen by bringing it up?

I’m not saying that any gomer up a tree doesn’t have the perfect right to say whatever he pleases, but if he’s dead wrong and shown to be so then it behooves him to shut up to maintain some credibility.

I will deny it.

So…?
I don’t care about altar calls…that’s a tradition of man from the other side of the fence.

Still you cannot sit there and try to tell me that he doesn’t do the “invitation” bit in his services, and I am sure that your pastor does too. Same idea…

Above, you misrepresented me, and my church. If misrepresenting people is good for you to do CM, why do make this statement about MacArthur, who is far more meticulous and careful with his facts concerning you than you are with your facts concerning him?At least now you understand that he is not a liar.

Because I am speaking only in defense of my Catholic faith. Aside from that I could largely care less about what MacArthur or any other a-C has to say.

Yeah…this is also a guy who only just recently corrected himself on the sonship of Christ? For all his scholarship he got lost on that one? That’s not my idea of a good teacher.

With respect to your misrepresenting me, are you too dumb to understand plain English, or just too lazy to check and be certain that what you are saying is true?

The fact is that if what you say is true then you are part of the exception and not the rule. (on the altar calls) Yay for you guys…One minor tradition of men down and all the rest yet to go.

I told you last year, that you are consistently wrong in your (mis)representing the faith of others, and as the reason for your consistent error, I said that you were careless in making unsupported statements. You continue to validate my claim.

Yet, this is bunkum…if the shoe doesn’t fit you…goody for you…but I know from very personal experience that it does indeed fit most of the n-Cs that I have associated with and whom I still associate with to this day.

The fact that MacArthur apparently misrepresents Catholicsim as to his allegation of mariolotry is enough by itself to disqualify him as any sort of credible “expert” with regard to the Catholic faith.

At least MacArthur, and I, labor diligently

not to misrepresent you.Yet he persists in alleging errors that simply do not exist. These things have no doubt been addressed by Catholics many many times and he has full access to these teachings and yet he gets it wrong?

I maintain that his is a deliberate intent to disparage the Catholic Church and in fact to attempt to deceive Catholics into converting away from our most holy faith. That is offensive anti-Catholicsm and dishonest.

The only remote excuse could be lack of proper understanding…but you assert that that is not so. So then what else is there but dishonesty?

I could care less if he feels that his intentions are good. If he is wrong about what he tells Catholics about their own faith and has been corrected (and I feel quite sure that he has.), then I have to question his integrity. What other logical conclusion can a rational person come to?

Again, you may disagree with his arguments, and his conclusions, but his facts are right; that is more than I can say for you.

But I don’t claim to be a trained professional clergyman and theologian and I don’t bash other people’s religions. Ther’s a big difference in me being wrong about you or even any other a-C, but I at least know what my faith teaches and won’t be deceived by the likes of you or MacArthur.

Your Church is in the International Spotlight by its own choice. As such, the RCC subjects itself

to scrutiny, and criticism.And it’s done just fine for about 2,000 years which is a whole lot longer than all the myriad errant post reformation step children that seek to disparage her and deceive her members.

Quit blaming everyone for the problems of your Church. They are of Her own making.

I haven’t blamed a single soul for any such thing and you can drop this smokescreen as well.

If people like you and MacArthur don’t want Catholics like me calling you on errors then don’t speak out on aspects of Catholicism that you either don’t understand, or just want to disagree with so that you can proselytize Catholics out of their faith. If that’s why you are here…you are wasting your time so long as there is at least one guy like me here. Unfortunately, (for you) there are far more than just me here and better besides.
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

 

[lak611]

MacArthur says that Catholics offer adoration to Mary… Surely even you know this is not correct right?

eternallifeministries.org/jm_ect.htm

Sorry if you guys already discussed this. I havent been following the thread but I noticed this last one where you said he doesnt misrepresent Catholic beliefs on Mary… I would say that saying we offer adoration to Mary is misrepresenting our devotion to the BVM. wouldnt you? I am not going to say he did this on purpose, but he is mistaken here.

You are correct that he definitely misrepresents Catholic beliefs on Mary. He also has many awful statements that misrepresent what our Mass is about. Go to my first post (I’m the OP) for that link.

 

[Melchior]

:bigyikes: How could this man be considered a Christian at all, much less a Baptist, if he denied Christ’s eternal Sonship?

That’s the irony of some forms of Evangelicalism, because he believed in the Trinity he was orthodox. But what they often miss is true Christology which is essential to orthodox, biblical Christianity. In other words, his heresy got a wink and a nudge by his peers who new better because it was not a well known heresy in his circles. Another case of majoring in the minors.

Mel

 

[Melchior]

He’s not a Baptist.

I am glad that he has re-thought that as well. Here is his statement on the
Eternal Sonship issue.

Of course he is a Baptist. I Calvinistic or Reformed Baptist if you like, but his core beliefs are baptist. You don’t have to have Baptist of the fornt door of a church to be baptist. His beliefs are Reformed Baptist. He would not deny that.

 

[Melchior]

Sandusky,

I have no doubt that McArthur is sincere and really bellieves what he says. But he is just the typical type that is raised to believe the worst about Rome and thus thinking Catholics lost he assumes the worst possible understanding of their beliefs. he interprets them according to his own preconceptions instead of letting them define their own beliefs. It always comes down to “This is what you really believe…”. I absolutely hate it when Catholics, on this board even, ignore what protestants say about their own beliefs and pour their own worst possible understanding into their beliefs. One example is faith alone. How many time has a well menaing, but ignorant Catholic said “See they think they can do whatever they want and live like a heathen!”. Of course anyone who knows Evangelicals can tell you they put most of the rest of us to shame is godly living. But it cuts both ways. MacArthur is cut from the same cloth and distorts Catholics beliefs in the same manner.

You want to know what Catholics believe? Ask a Catholic.

Mel

 

[sandusky]

Church Militant:

Yeah…this is also a guy who only just recently corrected himself on the sonship of Christ? For all his scholarship he got lost on that one? That’s not my idea of a good teacher.

No your idea of a good teacher is one who sings: “As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, another soul from purgatory springs.”

But, you cry, “that’s not fair!” That error was corrected. MacArthur corrected his error as well. Why do forgive the one, and not the other?
Church Militant:

Still you cannot sit there and try to tell me that he doesn’t do the “invitation” bit in his services, and I am sure that your pastor does too.

But, Church Militant, I did just here and tell you that, and he is my pastor; do hear anything anyone else says, or just what you want to hear?
Roman Catholic:

Sorry if you guys already discussed this. I havent been following the thread but I noticed this last one where you said he doesnt misrepresent Catholic beliefs on Mary… I would say that saying we offer adoration to Mary is misrepresenting our devotion to the BVM. wouldnt you?

lak611:

You are correct that he definitely misrepresents Catholic beliefs on Mary. He also has many awful statements that misrepresent what our Mass is about. Go to my first post (I’m the OP) for that link.

Church Militant:

The fact that MacArthur apparently misrepresents Catholicsim as to his allegation of mariolotry is enough by itself to disqualify him as any sort of credible “expert” with regard to the Catholic faith.

I could care less if he feels that his intentions are good. If he is wrong about what he tells Catholics about their own faith and has been corrected (and I feel quite sure that he has.), then I have to question his integrity. What other logical conclusion can a rational person come to?

But you are not thinking logically and rationally. You are thinking emotionally; this is all about your Feelings.

You guys still don’t get it. OK, let me illustrate.

In an earlier post on this page of this thread, Setter made this statement:

setter:

At a minimum, MacArthur and Co. are failed disciples of Christ in need of repentance and counter-examples of the Gospel and what it means to model Christian character and charity to all.

Is Setter misrepresenting MacArthur? No. Setter has a number of facts from which he has constructed an ideal model of a Christian disciple, and Christian character and charity; reasoning from those facts, and assuming them to be true, Setter has come to the conclusion that MacArthur does not fit that model. A logical conclusion; however, Setter’s facts and his model may be incorrect; he has not presented his facts for examination; if his facts are wrong, that is a misrepresentation.

MacArthur has done what Setter has done, and he has gone one step further, namely, MacArthur presented his facts to a group of Catholic Priests and Apologists, and, after examining those facts, those same Priests and Aplogists affirmed that those facts were correct. From those correct facts, MacArthur has concluded that Catholics adore Mary.

Furthermore, if memory serves me correctly, MacArthur presents the Catholic argument that Catholics do not adore, or worship Mary, and he goes into the semantics of latria, dulia, etc., and he still concludes that Catholics adore, or worship Mary. A logical, rational conclusion based upon the affirmation of those whose doctrines he was examining, that his facts are correct.

Again, you are may disagree with his conclusion, but he is not misrepresenting you.

Do you understand now?

 

[Catherine_S]

Where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sins (Heb 10:18)

For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified (10:14)

He sits at the right hand of God waiting until that time that His enemies be made a footstool for His feet (10:12-13).

.
Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross is concluded as an event, but through the Holy Spirit it continues in time sacramentally and in eternity mystically. This insight provides** the key to understanding John’s heavenly vision of the resurrected Jesus, who appeared as “a Lamb standing as if it had been slaughtered” (Rev. 5:6). While his act of physical death will never be repeated,** Jesus’ act of total self-giving to the Father for us(Rom. 8:32) continues** eternally** in Love**—**that is, the Holy Spirit.
catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9901fea2.asp
catholic.com/library/ecc…eucharistia.asp
.

 

[Catherine_S]

Furthermore, if memory serves me correctly, MacArthur presents the Catholic argument that Catholics do not adore, or worship Mary, and he goes into the semantics of latria, dulia, etc., and he still concludes that Catholics adore, or worship Mary. A logical, rational conclusion based upon the affirmation of those whose doctrines he was examining, that his facts are correct.

Again, you are may disagree with his conclusion, but he is not misrepresenting you.

Do you understand now?

MacArthur lacks wisdom but he is clever !
.
A powerful analogy can be used to show non-Catholics how strange this seems to Catholics. If an Evangelical believes that devotion to Mary replaces proper devotion to Jesus, ask him to imagine what it would be like if he discovered that another Christian group thought Evangelicals were in grave error because of their emphasis on the Bible. Ask him to imagine that these fictional Christians accuse Evangelicals of neglecting Jesus because of their devotion to the Bible.

These hypothetical Christians might say, "You Evangelicals stress the Bible to the neglect of Jesus. You call your churches ‘Bible’ churches and have ‘Bible’ colleges instead of ‘Christian’ churches and colleges. Inside your church you don’t have pictures of Jesus, you don’t have crucifixes; and you don’t have the Stations of the Cross. Instead, all you have is a big central pulpit to preach the Bible."

The accusers could point out, "The New Testament says the early Christians ‘devoted themselves . . . to the breaking of the bread’ (Acts 2:42) and that **the way to remember Jesus and proclaim his death is through the Eucharist **(1 Cor. 11:24-26). Yet you Evangelicals celebrate the Lord’s Supper once a month, or even less often, and the main feature of your church service is a long Bible sermon.
.
In the face of such charges regarding Mary Catholics reply, **"Are you serious? **How can you possibly make such a fundamental mistake about what we believe? We admit that some Catholics may overemphasize Mary, just like some Evangelicals may take extreme views on the Bible. We don’t venerate Mary for herself but because by her free consent she gave us our Savior and because she constantly leads us to him. If you took time to study our whole teaching and practice, you’ll see it’s unreasonable to make such a towering mistake.
catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0301fea3.asp
.
.

 

[FromTheCrossroa]

But you are not thinking logically and rationally. You are thinking emotionally; this is all about your Feelings.

You guys still don’t get it. OK, let me illustrate.

In an earlier post on this page of this thread, Setter made this statement:Is Setter misrepresenting MacArthur? No. Setter has a number of facts from which he has constructed an ideal model of a Christian disciple, and Christian character and charity; reasoning from those facts, and assuming them to be true, Setter has come to the conclusion that MacArthur does not fit that model. A logical conclusion; however, Setter’s facts and his model may be incorrect; he has not presented his facts for examination; if his facts are wrong, that is a misrepresentation.

MacArthur has done what Setter has done, and he has gone one step further, namely, MacArthur presented his facts to a group of Catholic Priests and Apologists, and, after examining those facts, those same Priests and Aplogists affirmed that those facts were correct. From those correct facts, MacArthur has concluded that Catholics adore Mary.

It would seem you are using the same fallacy of logic. Of course Catholics worship saints and Mary. Before hitting the reply button, please read the rest

According to the dictionary, the definition of worship is:

1.) reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred

2.) formal or ceremonious rendering of such honor and homage

3.) to feel an adoring reverence or regard for (any person or thing).

4.) to feel an adoring reverence or regard.

Every holy man/woman in the Bible is worshipped (by definition) by all sects of Christianity. What you conclude though is that Catholics ascribe to Mary and the Saints what should be for God alone. I wholehartedly disagree.

God himself worshiped (honored) Abraham, Issac and Jacob by calling himself “the God of…”. Catholics do pray to saints sometimes. For me personally, I don’t. Maybe it’s because I was not raised in the Church or one that did. I don’t see anything wrong with asking a saint for help. When we do, they intercede for us on our behalf to God. That is in scripture by the way.

What a Catholic (Christian) can never do is pray to a saint and expect the prayer to be answered by their “power”. I’ve never heard a Catholic or Christian to pray in Mary’s name or in any other name. If they did, I would be the first to point out the error. Catholics ALWAYS conclude in the name of the Father, The Son & Holy Spirit.

I used to have a problem with mentioning saints in mass or saying the rosary. I don’t any longer because I understand things like the “hail mary” are prayerful meditations straight from the word of God. Although the rosary has a lot of Mary in it, what it does is re-tell the life of Christ. Pretty cool if you ask me.

Anyways, I do sincerely hope you stay here and clear up the misconceptions you have about us.

Peace be with you!

 

[twiggymoo]

I used to listen to MacArthur on the radio and even bought one of his books about worship. I may be dense, but I never got anything out of what he said, either via radio sermon or reading his book. To me it was jibberish even though I had an open mind/heart to what he said. It seemed to me that something was always missing but I couldn’t determine what that was.

 

[sandusky]

Melchior:

Of course he is a Baptist…You don’t have to have Baptist of the fornt door of a church to be baptist. His beliefs are Reformed Baptist.

That’s true, Mel; I will not argue with you; a Baptist he is.

Melchior:

I have no doubt that McArthur is sincere and really bellieves what he says. But he is just the typical type that is raised to believe the worst about Rome and thus thinking Catholics lost he assumes the worst possible understanding of their beliefs. he interprets them according to his own preconceptions instead of letting them define their own beliefs. It always comes down to “This is what you really believe…”.

Mel, see my post #104 above; MacArthur is not assuming anything; he is reasoning from facts, affirmed to be correct by a group of Catholic Priests and apologists, and he is arguing to a conclusion from those facts.

 

[sandusky]

MacArthur lacks wisdom but he is clever !
.
A powerful analogy can be used to show non-Catholics how strange this seems to Catholics. If an Evangelical believes that devotion to Mary replaces proper devotion to Jesus, ask him to imagine what it would be like if he discovered that another Christian group thought Evangelicals were in grave error because of their emphasis on the Bible. Ask him to imagine that these fictional Christians accuse Evangelicals

of neglecting Jesus because of their devotion to the Bible.

These hypothetical Christians might say, "You Evangelicals stress the Bible to the neglect of Jesus. You call your churches ‘Bible’ churches and have ‘Bible’ colleges instead of ‘Christian’ churches and colleges. Inside your church you don’t have pictures of Jesus, you don’t have crucifixes; and you don’t have the Stations of the Cross. Instead, all you have is a big central pulpit to preach the Bible."

The accusers could point out, "The New Testament says the early Christians ‘devoted themselves . . . to the breaking of the bread’ (Acts 2:42) and that the way to remember Jesus and proclaim his death is through the Eucharist (1 Cor. 11:24-26). Yet you Evangelicals celebrate the Lord’s Supper once a month, or even less often, and the main feature of your church service is a long Bible sermon.
.
In the face of such charges regarding Mary Catholics reply, "Are you serious? How can you possibly make such **a fundamental mistake about what we believe? We admit that some Catholics may overemphasize Mary, just like some Evangelicals may take extreme views on the Bible. We don’t venerate Mary for herself but because by her free consent she gave us our Savior and because she constantly leads us to him. If you took time to study our whole teaching and practice, you’ll see it’s unreasonable to make such a towering mistake.**Thank you, Catherine.

You disagree with MacArthur’s conclusion; that’s fine.

But the topic is whether or not MacArthur misrepresented the Church in the facts he presented concerning Marian devotion; he did not. He presented his facts to a group of Catholic Priests and Apologists, who affirmed that MacArthur’s facts are correct.

 

[sandusky]

FromTheCrossroa:

It would seem you are using the same fallacy of logic. Of course Catholics worship saints and Mary. Before hitting the reply button, please read the rest

According to the dictionary, the definition of worship is:

1.) reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred

2.) formal or ceremonious rendering of such honor and homage

3.) to feel an adoring reverence or regard for (any person or thing).

4.) to feel an adoring reverence or regard.

Every holy man/woman in the Bible is worshipped (by definition) by all sects of Christianity. What you conclude though is that Catholics ascribe to Mary and the Saints what should be for God alone. I wholehartedly disagree.

God himself worshiped (honored) Abraham, Issac and Jacob by calling himself “the God of…”. Catholics do pray to saints sometimes. For me personally, I don’t. Maybe it’s because I was not raised in the Church or one that did. I don’t see anything wrong with asking a saint for help. When we do, they intercede for us on our behalf to God. That is in scripture by the way.

What a Catholic (Christian) can never do is pray to a saint and expect the prayer to be answered by their “power”. I’ve never heard a Catholic or Christian to pray in Mary’s name or in any other name. If they did, I would be the first to point out the error. Catholics ALWAYS conclude in the name of the Father, The Son & Holy Spirit.

I used to have a problem with mentioning saints in mass or saying the rosary. I don’t any longer because I understand things like the “hail mary” are prayerful meditations straight from the word of God. Although the rosary has a lot of Mary in it, what it does is re-tell the life of Christ. Pretty cool if you ask me.

Anyways, I do sincerely hope you stay here and clear up the misconceptions you have about us.

Peace be with you!

Thanks for the post, you agree with MacArthur’s conclusion, but with the qualifications listed above; IOW, you really disagree with MacArthur’s conclusion, and that’s fine.

But the topic is whether or not MacArthur misrepresented the Church in the facts he presented concerning Marian devotion; he did not. He presented his facts to a group of Catholic Priests and Apologists, who affirmed that MacArthur’s facts are correct.

 

[Mickey]

But the topic is whether or not MacArthur misrepresented the Church

A conclusion which misrepresents the Catholic Church, even though it may be based on valid facts, is still a misrepresentation.

 

[rtconstant]

Sandusky, I think you got it backwards. You’re arguing from an emotional connection to your pastor. You need him to be above board on this because the alternatives is either he’s not that bright or he’s intentionally being deceptive. Who wants to think their pastor is either.

I took a look at the sermon that he preached wherein he mentions having a few minutes to go over his understanding on some things with some priests and seminarians. Assuming that he was being honest about that, then I can see where that he can claim to have confirmed his understanding of Church doctrine and yet completely misrepresent it.

Let’s say if he asked: “Do you believe that Mary is Co-mediatrix?” Well the a Catholic’s answer to that would be yes. However, when presenting his sermon to the congregation he fails to define what Co-mediatrix means. Knowing his audience he realizes that they will come up with their own assumptions about the definition and that those assumptions will fit into the web of deception he wishes to weave.

Must protestants being unfamiliar with Catholic termanology will assume that this puts Mary on equal status with Christ in Mediating our prayers to the Father. A Catholic understands that this simply means that as the woman who willingly allowed herself to be the bearer of Christ, she played her part in God’s plan to give us His Son to mediate for us.

Also a Catholic understands that asking Mary (or any other Saint) to pray for us is no different than asking a friend at Church to pray for you.

MacArthur is preying on the ignorance of his congregation.

 

[Writer]

A fellow named John MacArthur, who has a radio program called “Grace to You” has a particularly anti-Catholic bias. He says that the Mass is anti-Christian on this link: gty.org/resources.php?section=transcripts&aid=231486. He also has numerous links on his website that accuse Catholics of worshipping Mary. What do you think is the best response to this fellow?

There was a great thread on this guy a couple years ago, and I wrote him at that time. He never replied, of course…

 

[Catherine_S]

Thank you, Catherine.

You disagree with MacArthur’s conclusion; that’s fine.

But the topic is whether or not MacArthur misrepresented the Church in the facts he presented concerning Marian devotion; he did not. He presented his facts to a group of Catholic Priests and Apologists, who affirmed that MacArthur’s facts are correct.

He certainly did misrepresent these teachings…to his congregation.
I think he is a **very calculating **and manipulative man. He will not stand **the test of time **though :nope: half truths have a very short shelf life especially in our day.
.

 

[Mickey]

“He has come too near to the truth, and has forgotten that truth is a magnet, with the powers of attraction and repulsion. It is impossible to be just to the Catholic Church. The moment men cease to pull against it they feel a tug towards it. The moment they cease to shout it down they begin to listen to it with pleasure. The moment they try to be fair to it they begin to be fond of it. But when that affection has passed a certain point it begins to take on the tragic and menacing grandeur of a great love affair. When one has entered the Church, he finds that the Church is much larger inside than it is outside.”

---

G. K. Chesterton

 

[sandusky]

rtconstant:

Sandusky, I think you got it backwards.

Of course you do! I didn’t expect you to think any differently. But maybe there are some thinkers on the forum who will understand.

rtconstant:

You’re arguing from an emotional connection to your pastor. You need him to be above board on this because the alternatives is either he’s not that bright or he’s intentionally being deceptive. Who wants to think their pastor is either.

You’re projecting RT.

rtconstant:

I took a look at the sermon that he preached wherein he mentions having a few minutes to go over his understanding on some things with some priests and seminarians.

You didn’t read it very well, RT, because there was no mention of “a few minutes.”

Here is what he said:

Interestingly enough I this past week had the opportunity to be on the Larry King Show, some of you probably saw it, with a whole group of Roman Catholics and several priests. And in the Green Room there were some Catholic apologists and Catholic media people, and Roman Catholic publicity people and there were some young men from the Vatican Seminary and the usual Father Manning. I was checking on my facts as I had the opportunity to do that in talking to them about things and it was affirmed to me that the very things that we are talking about in this study of Mary are the things to which they are truly and genuinely devoted.

rtconstant:

Assuming that he was being honest about that, then I can see where that he can claim to have confirmed his understanding of Church doctrine and yet completely misrepresent it.

Why do you think he wouldn’t be honest about it? Because he realized my need to have him be honest, and so he lied, because the alternatives are just too horrible for me, and so he preyed on my ignorance?

rtconstant:

Let’s say if he asked…

I presented you with links to the transcripts to read them. That statement shows you haven’t read them, but instead, you want to argue from your hypothetical. You are lazy.

rtconstant:

Also a Catholic understands that asking Mary (or any other Saint) to pray for us is no different than asking a friend at Church to pray for you.

There is a difference; I can see my friend because I know where he is; you assume that the saint is in the right place to help you.

But, how can you know? Catholics claim that they are not so arrogant as to know the eternal disposition of anyone, correct?