Quote
Mark Scheiderer
Thanks bjw!
I thought Johnson might be a ghost writer since I saw a web posting to links to some of his messages which were the same topics MacA ( or was it?) covered in "The Truth War". That's the only MacA book I've ever read and what I did NOT understand was why he had a chapter on "Lordship Salvation". It didn't fit in with the topic of the book. Would I be correct in saying that he self-promotes/advertises in his own books?
Mark

All I know about Phil is that I heard in the early days he had the same job Staats now occupies, but now is more out on the frontlines writing his own stuff and was doing production for the radio program, as well as editing for some of MacArthur's books. I believe there are many accomplices behind this cult, such as Phil Johnson as well as the college and seminary faculty. To me it is far too crafty a scheme to be thought up by only one man.

Also, I believe the books are "self-promotion" and "advertising" in that they are written for the purpose into hooking you further into the movement, to purchasing the other materials, taking the classes, etc. So, in that respect I could definitely see plugs for Lordship Salvation turning up out of place, even when they are talking about something unrelated. For instance, John MacArthur has written articles for Answers in Genesis's Creation magazine, as well as paid for advertisements for TMC in the mag, so that's just one example.

To me, what made it look suspiciously like there is a ghost writer is the way so many of his canned responses are repeated throughout the works. I remember I bought some of the smaller books from the bookstore (like Body Dynamics) and it was mostly a rehash of stuff I already heard him say or write elsewhere, sometimes said word-for-word verbatim. I am almost certain if you were to purchase the large books about the salvation doctrines, such as "Faith Works" and "The Gospel According to Jesus," and then read some of the smaller books on the same topic, a lot of the ideas are probably rehashed. When my friend told me he heard they had used ghostwriters before it didn't surprise me, but he never showed me any proof, so I don't know for sure. I guess we can only specualte until someone high up in the organization leaves and speaks out.

For those of you researching this group I thought I would put an article here from the New York Times about the cult's damaging Nouthetic Counseling doctrines:
http://www.nytimes.com/1985/05/20/us/church-sued-over-a-suicide-says-it-will-change-training.html

A few things to note here: It admits that the cult teaches that mental illness is the result of sinning. This suicide occured in 1979, and they said they would reform their practices. However, when I joined the cult in the late 90s this doctrine was still being taught, that all mental illness or problems in your life were the result of unconfessed sin and you were not permitted to seek outside help. The only change they probably did was add the waiver you have to sign.

Hmmm...I wonder if pictures of Ken Nally and Angelica Ericsson will be up in the MacArthur museum they just opened, since that is the end product of his counseling doctrines.

Quote
bjw
Here's a picture of MacArthur's top execs Sharon Staats and Mark Tatlock showing off the new two-story museum they built to honor MacArthur that is now finally open. (the computer rendering was sent to me on a postcard that I mentioned earlier in this thread):

http://www.the-signal.com/archives/64011/

It's shameful someone responsible for ruining this many lives gets a museum to honor them. Also notice the spin Staats and Tatlock put on it, a lot different from how they described it on the postcard mentioned earlier in the thread, but still bad.

bjw -

I clicked on the link above, read the article and could not believe this part:

"John MacArthur is a very humble gentleman", Tatlock said.

I have NEVER, EVER heard anybody describe MacA as humble. The word I hear the most about him, from nearly everyone I have talked to is how ARROGANT he is!

What lunacy!

These people are idolators!!!

The worst part is, is that when he is fully exposed, there are those who will never accept the FACTS as TRUTH.

His defenders will probably resort to the cultic tactic of circling the wagons and bringing out the flame-throwers.

Godspeed to your exposure of this bondage,

Mark

Quote
Mark Scheiderer
bjw -

I clicked on the link above, read the article and could not believe this part:

"John MacArthur is a very humble gentleman", Tatlock said.

I have NEVER, EVER heard anybody describe MacA as humble. The word I hear the most about him, from nearly everyone I have talked to is how ARROGANT he is!

What lunacy!

These people are idolators!!!

The worst part is, is that when he is fully exposed, there are those who will never accept the FACTS as TRUTH.

His defenders will probably resort to the cultic tactic of circling the wagons and bringing out the flame-throwers.

Godspeed to your exposure of this bondage,

Mark

I know what you're talking about. Even when talking to MacArthur in private it seems like he would always try to correct you about something, and he always comes across as the final authority on everything. He's probably the least humble person I've ever met. He does have a very charismatic personality, and when you first meet him he comes across as being very charming and caring to people. He seems very friendly on the outset, but if you try to engage him in a serious conversation he quickly becomes aggrivated and will try to correct you in everything you talk to him about. He can be very stern at times, and definitely has a "cult leader" personality.

I too agree the museum is a form of idolatry. The fact that people aren't leaving after them building a museum like this speaks volumes. This is going completely overboard, even beyond what I thought they were capable of, and I know they are capable of quite a bit.

You are right that most rank-and-file members will not accept the facts. They see MacArthur as the only one who can bring Christianity back into the way it should be. So, they endure all of the abuse the cult dishes out and commit the attrocities they do because they believe it is for the greatest good. The see the end justifying the means.

Also, remember some of their first exposure to anything remotely Christian was through MacArthur, and they see no other option. Some come from countries that are much less religious than America They are dazzled by all of the fancy terminology and Greek/Hebrew words and the elaborate organization and they see no way it could possibly not be true. They are submerged in the literature and sermons the ministry puts out that attacks all other belief systems they eventually begin to see the whole world divided into two categories: Lordship Salvation and Non-Lordship Salvation.

You could tell them about the suicides, harassment of former members, or any other of the bad points of the cult, and they would either not believe it or somehow rationalize it. The mind control is very powerful that is used by this group. Many of them are so depressed because of the strict life they have to lead, but they see no other alternative. That is how powerful the mind control is.

Oh, and about how the article says they kept it a secret from him. How is that possible when MacArthur and Staats offices are on the second floor of that building? Is he that deaf that he couldn't hear the constant construction to build an elaborate structure like that?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/23/2012 08:37AM by bjw.

Reading some of the rants they are such Straw-man arguments.

It appears that you are mad a at man and tearing down and attacking a man, not so much his teachings or theology.

What do believe is wrong about what Johnny Mac preaches or wrights about, in light of the bible?

I have read your objection to what you called Lordship salvation maybe you could enlighten us me to what is your Soteriology the doctrines of salvation.

who would you point to as being a better teacher?

Hi BHeart,

Forgot to mention, a few good teachers that are much better.
Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, you know, God, the bible.
It is in our nature to follow "a man" but Jesus said
don't call anyone your teacher or leader etc.

Our problem is we just "have to have" a guru to
hop on board with, but Jesus said " Follow Me"

He said "follow Me" because He showed us How to
be, and teaches us too, still!

JM says "follow me" (No thanks)
JM museum says "glory to me" (no way)
it is not him we should follow, at all.

Very Truly Yours,

GTW?

Do you really care about the answers to these questions or are you throwing out bait hoping to reel in arguing material? I have a lot of experience in dealing with MacArthur types, including several of his protégées and followers. What I've learned is that what matters to them is seeking or creating debate and controversy whenever and wherever they can so they can win with their theological superiority and manipulation. When they need to play a trump card, it's "truth". Their truth, lower case "t".

Is it possible you aren't really interested in what other people on this board have to say yet you're finding your own posts compelling? (Rhetorical. I'm pretty sure I know the answer.)

People are here to say why and how they've been damaged spiritually by this man's ministry. If you like what he's selling, buy. If you enjoy defending him, defend him. Just know that people who have escaped the master's prigpen have probably heard it all before.

Quote
BraveHeart
Reading some of the rants they are such Straw-man arguments.

An argument is not a "straw man" argument if it is based on facts. The suicides, MacArthur museum, denial of mental illness, and authoritarian leadership (aggressive discipline) were all proven in previous posts with links provided and are indesputable facts. At least 3 people on here are former members of the cult either in the main organization or in one of its many extensions, and are witnesses to the abuses that take place. Therefore, they are not "straw man" arguments but are based on facts.

Quote
BraveHeart
It appears that you are mad a at man and tearing down and attacking a man, not so much his teachings or theology.

While the theology and teachings are partly at fault, I think I've made it clear on here my major beef with this group is not necessarily what they believe, its how what they believe is presented using deceptive tactics and mental abuse. If they would come right out with what they believe to potential recruits I would have no problem with them. However, it is not just "a man" that is at fault here, I've also made it clear there are many accomplices behind running this group.

Quote
BraveHeart
What do believe is wrong about what Johnny Mac preaches or wrights about, in light of the bible?

"Johnny Mac" is a common term of endearment used by his followers, so I know that is why you are defending him. This is also a common debate tactic they use, to ask the other person what they believe is wrong with Lordship Salvation, and then tearing it down using MacArthur's canned responses.

Let me just say, that, in my opinion, there are no beliefs in Lordship Salvation that can possibly be justified using the Bible. In fact, the Bible contadicts almost all of their major doctrines. Why do you think he has had to publish over 90+ books, including a Bible that has their beliefs at the bottom of each page? I could really go all night showing how, but that is not the scope of this forum. This is "Cult Education Forum" and "Destructive Churches" subforum. We are supposed to stick with discussing the cultic tactics of groups, not necessarily their beliefs.

However, to humor you I will give one obvious contradiction with the Bible concerning the "Restoration Process" doctrine. Currently their rule is basically you are to be shunned if you commit the same sin 3 times, and they use verses out of Matthew 18 to prove this belief. However, a closer reading of these verses will show that it is referring to someone who "trespasses against thee" as in verse 15. The person trespasses against you, you are supposed to confront him, then bring 1 or 2 witnesses, since out of the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses every word is established. If he still doesn't hear them you are to go to the church. MacArthur always seems to stop here.

If you go on, in verses 19 and 20 it says the reason for this is wherever 2 or 3 are gathered in His name, He is in the midst of them. This means that if it is God's will, the person will make up with you if he has done something wrong to you, since it is Christ that is the restorer, not a counselor or church member, and it is clearly referring to fellowship between people, not God and people. We see this in the next part where Peter asks shall we forgive 7 times? Jesus says no, 70 times 7. This nullifies the Lordship view of getting 3 chances for forgiveness, since Jesus says it is unlimited. The chapter goes on to illustrate the point further with the Parable of the Servant, who did not have compassion to forgive the way he was forgiven.

Matthew 18 says nothing whatsoever about looking for sin in other's lives, church discipline, dealing with sins believers confess to others, it has nothing to do with any of that. In fact, the overarching theme of Matthew 18 is mercy and compassion to others. It teaches compassion to children, unlimited forgiveness, compassion to your fellowman. It does not teach what MacArthur says it does when he takes one section of the chapter out of context.

Further, Nouthetic Counseling is built on the same faulty premise that all mental illness or problems in your life are caused by unconfessed sin, and you must confess these sins to your counselor and not stumble over them more than 3 times, or you are shunned by the church. Even though the passages are about one believer trespassing against another believer, and deciding the matter with Christ's help "in the midst of them," and the person is to be forgiven 70 x 7 or unlimited, the counseling doctrines are built on the premise of the verses about the first three encounters with the person taken out of context, and rather than "trespasses against thee" it is about sins you commit against God, even in your thoughts or other types of sins that are not "trespasses against believers."

This is also why all Christian churches are not rushing to implement the Restoration Process or get Nouthetic Counseling departments established at their churches. The Lordship view is a minority, and I would be surprised if any church outside of the Lordship movement interpreted these verses MacArthur's way.

Quote
BraveHeart
I have read your objection to what you called Lordship salvation maybe you could enlighten us me to what is your Soteriology the doctrines of salvation.

I already did in the earlier post where I explained to you about the "Character of Genuine Saving Faith" list in the back of the MacArthur Study Bible. It was an answer I gave to one of your earlier posts and I believe its back on Page 6 or so. I told you completely my Soteriology, my view of salvation, and how I believe a person is saved. I also tell you the only way a person will not burn in hell eternally. It was all in that post. Why do you keep asking me?

This is a common tactic they use because the idea is that if you disagree with MacArthur there must be something in your life or beliefs you are not talking about. They keep asking to get differing responses, then get what your beliefs are and explain what is wrong with them in light of Lordship Salvation, and try to find contradictions between your various responses. I know all of this because I lived it for two years. I have seen every debate tactic they have.

Quote
BraveHeart
who would you point to as being a better teacher?

Anyone who believes the Bible and is Non-Lordship Salvation.

Quote
BraveHeart
I have read your objection to what you called Lordship salvation maybe you could enlighten us me to what is your Soteriology the doctrines of salvation.

Just to prove that I did say what my soteriology (doctrine of salvation) is in an earlier post in this thread, here is what I said in September 2010 on page 6 of this thread, underline added for emphasis:

Quote
bjw
Now, I do not consider this the Gospel because it is an authoritarian cult that gets people by deception and ruins lives. My view is that our salvation, that is, us not burning in hell eternally, is only accomplished through the blood of Christ, not through any works or merit-based system, and not by learning any theology or going to any church. My view of the function of churches is to give us a place to grow spiritually and do works not because we're trying to prove we are saved but because we are receiving blessings from a loving Heavenly Father that are both in this world and in the rewards we will receive in the world to come. Remeber, the Bible says salvation is not by works lest any man should boast.

Quote
BraveHeart
Reading some of the rants they are such Straw-man arguments.

It appears that you are mad a at man and tearing down and attacking a man, not so much his teachings or theology.

What do believe is wrong about what Johnny Mac preaches or wrights about, in light of the bible?

I have read your objection to what you called Lordship salvation maybe you could enlighten us me to what is your Soteriology the doctrines of salvation.

who would you point to as being a better teacher?

It probably goes without saying but my post was a reply to these comments. I forgot to paste the quote.