Truth, John MacArthur, and the Function of the Church
As a follow up (more of a case study, actually) to my last post, I read an interview recently with John MacArthur, an American Reformed evangelical writer and minister, most noted for his radio program entitled Grace to You. MacArthur is a fifth-generation pastor, a popular author and conference speaker, and has served as pastor-teacher of Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, California since 1969, and as President of The Master's College in Santa Clarita, California.
During the interview, MacArthur says this regarding the role of the Church:
"I believe the church has one function, and that is to guard the truth, to proclaim the truth and to live the truth. So you take the Word of God, you teach it, you proclaim it, you protect it, you defend it, and you live it, and that’s a church. The Word of God rightly divided, rightly understood."
This is a perfect example of a modernist perspective of Christianity, and a somewhat easy target for the postmodern critique thereof. As a modernist, MacArthur is saying "We (the Church) know the truth. Our job is guard, proclaim, preach and live it." The postmodernist, even a postmodern Christian, would rightly point out that such a belief rings of a great deal of arrogance, if not out-and-out blasphemy. They would rightly point to the countless instances where the Church, again proclaiming to know the truth, has clearly misunderstood it, as evidenced by its actions (the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc.).
But that critique, though justified, will not in and of itself do. The post-postmodernist understands the critique but does not stop there. The post-postmodernist Christian believes in truth, and believes that truth to lie in the person of a crucified peasant Jewish prohet who now sits as the Lord of the world. The post-postmodernist has faith in that belief, but does not then claim the arrogant position that "I and my congregation know all there is to know about this Truth, and we will take it as our task to preach it, defend it and live it." The post-postmodernist Christian says: "I will devote my life to better understand this Truth, to learn from others, to be guided by the Spirit to live in accordance on that slow, gradual, fragile road toward that better understanding, knowing that I will never fully achieve it in this world. And in that life, and with that attitude, I will somehow be a light to those around me, and God Himself will there be present."
Isn't that the very image that Paul is trying to communicate to us in Romans 8, where he says, in stark contrast to MacArthur, that the role of the Church is to be in groaning prayer at the very places where the world is in pain, that God the Holy Spirit is also groaning within us, and therefore, when we are at those places, God Himself is made present? You see? If anyone knows the truth, it is God, who is the Truth. But in Romans we are given an image of this Ultimate Truth as groaning within us as we groan within the world, awaiting our redemption and that of the entire creation.
Not much there to label "arrogant."
That's just my opinion.
Grace and Peace,
Raffi
During the interview, MacArthur says this regarding the role of the Church:
"I believe the church has one function, and that is to guard the truth, to proclaim the truth and to live the truth. So you take the Word of God, you teach it, you proclaim it, you protect it, you defend it, and you live it, and that’s a church. The Word of God rightly divided, rightly understood."
This is a perfect example of a modernist perspective of Christianity, and a somewhat easy target for the postmodern critique thereof. As a modernist, MacArthur is saying "We (the Church) know the truth. Our job is guard, proclaim, preach and live it." The postmodernist, even a postmodern Christian, would rightly point out that such a belief rings of a great deal of arrogance, if not out-and-out blasphemy. They would rightly point to the countless instances where the Church, again proclaiming to know the truth, has clearly misunderstood it, as evidenced by its actions (the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc.).
But that critique, though justified, will not in and of itself do. The post-postmodernist understands the critique but does not stop there. The post-postmodernist Christian believes in truth, and believes that truth to lie in the person of a crucified peasant Jewish prohet who now sits as the Lord of the world. The post-postmodernist has faith in that belief, but does not then claim the arrogant position that "I and my congregation know all there is to know about this Truth, and we will take it as our task to preach it, defend it and live it." The post-postmodernist Christian says: "I will devote my life to better understand this Truth, to learn from others, to be guided by the Spirit to live in accordance on that slow, gradual, fragile road toward that better understanding, knowing that I will never fully achieve it in this world. And in that life, and with that attitude, I will somehow be a light to those around me, and God Himself will there be present."
Isn't that the very image that Paul is trying to communicate to us in Romans 8, where he says, in stark contrast to MacArthur, that the role of the Church is to be in groaning prayer at the very places where the world is in pain, that God the Holy Spirit is also groaning within us, and therefore, when we are at those places, God Himself is made present? You see? If anyone knows the truth, it is God, who is the Truth. But in Romans we are given an image of this Ultimate Truth as groaning within us as we groan within the world, awaiting our redemption and that of the entire creation.
Not much there to label "arrogant."
That's just my opinion.
Grace and Peace,
Raffi
