I am surprised they would think that about Graham since his gospel presentation does call for a Lordship commitment.

Did MacArthur or anyone in leadership ever say specifically that Ryrie or any other Free Grace teacher was not saved? Were those in the Bible studies that felt that way about Ryrie ever corrected by anyone higher up?

What do you mean by "Lordship Commitment"?

& BJW
What part of the gospel message are you rejecting? Or maybe you could explane, what your understanding is of how people can be saved by God. The reason I say this, is in many churches people use phrases that end up having multiple meanings. I'm asking this in an effort to understand and have clarity.

Quote
isitacult?
I am surprised they would think that about Graham since his gospel presentation does call for a Lordship commitment.

Did MacArthur or anyone in leadership ever say specifically that Ryrie or any other Free Grace teacher was not saved? Were those in the Bible studies that felt that way about Ryrie ever corrected by anyone higher up?

At the time I was there the chaplin of the college wrote a 10 page report about Graham (I can't remember if this was an internal document for the seminary community or if it was published for the church at large) that gave major points trying to prove Graham was an "ecumentical evangelist" and taught easy-believism and ecumenicism, meaning that he could possibly deceive someone into thinking they were saved when they were not.

Charles Ryrie is extremely looked down upon in the Lordship movement for writing his book "So Great Salvation." The students there used to call him "Liarie Ryrie." MacArthur wrote a book called "Forgiveness" that has a chapter that really puts down the free grace movement, particularly Bob George's People to People ministries. In MacArthur's books he calls the grace of the free grace movement "cheap grace" because it is said to not be able to save a person. So, the answer is no, the higher ups never corrected anyone for saying free-gracers are not saved.

MacArthur's books "The Gospel According to Jesus" and "Fatih Works: the Gospel According to the Apostles" are an intro to MacArthur's views on salvation and how he feels about those that disagree with him (he calls all Christians that don't agree with him "Non-lordship salvation" even though many have varying views). In fact, the intro flap on "Faith Works" in the edition that was around 10 years ago says that the book is a stark contrast from the "easy gospel" being taught by most of Christianity. These books are a good setup to the us vs. them mentality that is later taught if one pursues membership in the church, or goes to the college/seminary. A quick glance through one of their book catelogues will show he has whole books and tapes devoted to knocking down other churches, like the charismatics, Catholics, Mormons, free-grace, believers in infant baptism, or anyone else he considers a liberal.

Quote
BraveHeart
What do you mean by "Lordship Commitment"?

& BJW
What part of the gospel message are you rejecting? Or maybe you could explane, what your understanding is of how people can be saved by God. The reason I say this, is in many churches people use phrases that end up having multiple meanings. I'm asking this in an effort to understand and have clarity.

This is a good example of what I was talking about. I do not reject any of the gospel because John MacArthur does not teach the gospel. It is a counseling cult that masquerades as Christianity, with a merit, works-based system in which one must do more and more, getting better and better all the time or else they are not saved.

In the back of the MacArthur Study Bible is a list called "Character of Genuine Saving Faith" which has a list of about 20 items that must be present in your life to merit salvation. You must constantly increase the abundance of these things and answer to a mentor, a "more mature Christian" (usually a small group leader or church appointed counselor that has paid thousands of dollars to the church to take "Nouthetic" counseling classes) who will evaluate how you are doing. Not doing enough (not topping your last progress) is grounds for discipline, or as they call it "stumbling." If you stumble over the same thing 3 times in a row you are shunned, or as they call it "treated as a pagan or a tax collector." Friends are made to constantly report on each other, and when they catch someone "stumbling" if the person was considered more mature than you, you are not allowed to question their findings. (There were signs up all through the dorm halls saying "Am I making sure everyone else is engaged in holy living?") You are not allowed to see a psychologist or psychiatrist as MacArthur feels these are a conspiracy to infiltrate Christianity by the evolutionists, and should you have depression, anxiety, etc. and want counseling you must sign a release stating that GCC will not be sued should you be injured or committ suicide while in their care. The longer you are in is the more authoritarian the church becomes over your life to the point that most of your free time is spent serving the church or witnessing, mostly to other churches who do not accept Lordship Salvation. You are constantly reminded that not doing enough works means you do not have genuine saving faith, thus condemning you to burn in hell for eternity.

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.

Yes, people use phrases that have different meanings, and I think that GCC exploits this to the max. When high school kids see fancy brochures with "non-denominational Christian college" and "Bible believing Christian" written all over them it strikes an impression that they will encounter what a majority of Christianity believes. In reality this is a relatively small movement, and I have met very few Christians outside of Southern California that have even heard of MacArthur, even though every Christian bookstore stocks his books (which in my opinion do not fully explain GCC's doctrine, but are only an introduction.) When I first got there and I would ask questions about what I heard they would say that I probably already believe like they do, I just understand it differently or use different terminology. When they use the word "Christian" they are using it to mean those that have what they consider "genuine saving faith." The word grace to them, as in the name of the church, refers only to God's grace in giving them the opportunity to enter the lordship/discipleship committment that MacArthur teaches, and not a "free" gift as most Christians would understand, since MacArthur's books say that all non-Lordship churches believe in "cheap grace." To the unsuspecting public this church would seem like it is run of the mill Christianity with words like "grace," "salvation," and "Christian" being used so freely, but a careful reading of MacArthur's books will reveal that this is not the case.

Quote
bjw
In reality this is a relatively small movement, and I have met very few Christians outside of Southern California that have even heard of MacArthur, even though every Christian bookstore stocks his books (which in my opinion do not fully explain GCC's doctrine, but are only an introduction.)

I don't think it is that small a movement. I am very far away from California and I am surrounded by people who are MacArthurites to one degree or another. His is a common name in these parts. This has been true for the past few decades. He is on the radio here, and the internet has made him widely accessible. I find that there are very few Christians around me who have not heard of him. I have friends across the border who have friends who have been to one of his gospel conferences, and are being pastored by graduates of TMS. If it is a small movement, it is definitely growing.

Quote
bjw
Charles Ryrie is extremely looked down upon in the Lordship movement for writing his book "So Great Salvation." The students there used to call him "Liarie Ryrie." MacArthur wrote a book called "Forgiveness" that has a chapter that really puts down the free grace movement, particularly Bob George's People to People ministries. In MacArthur's books he calls the grace of the free grace movement "cheap grace" because it is said to not be able to save a person. So, the answer is no, the higher ups never corrected anyone for saying free-gracers are not saved.

MacArthur's books "The Gospel According to Jesus" and "Fatih Works: the Gospel According to the Apostles" are an intro to MacArthur's views on salvation and how he feels about those that disagree with him (he calls all Christians that don't agree with him "Non-lordship salvation" even though many have varying views). In fact, the intro flap on "Faith Works" in the edition that was around 10 years ago says that the book is a stark contrast from the "easy gospel" being taught by most of Christianity. These books are a good setup to the us vs. them mentality that is later taught if one pursues membership in the church, or goes to the college/seminary. A quick glance through one of their book catelogues will show he has whole books and tapes devoted to knocking down other churches, like the charismatics, Catholics, Mormons, free-grace, believers in infant baptism, or anyone else he considers a liberal.

So we can take it that when MacArthur speaks like Free Grace men are heretics, what he means is that they are not saved men, not that they are saved but have fallen into serious error? That is truly amazing. I find it incredible that anyone could read Ryrie, or L.S. Chafer, or any of the early Dallas men and draw the conclusion that they are not saved.

You must constantly increase the abundance of these things and answer to a mentor, a "more mature Christian" (usually a small group leader or church appointed counselor that has paid thousands of dollars to the church to take "Nouthetic" counseling classes) who will evaluate how you are doing. Not doing enough (not topping your last progress) is grounds for discipline, or as they call it "stumbling." If you stumble over the same thing 3 times in a row you are shunned, or as they call it "treated as a pagan or a tax collector."

I would think this kind of set up would make a person's personal assurance of salvation, or lack thereof, to be largely dependent on the assessment of these mentors. That seems to give them an undue amount of power.

Do the people seem to have any sense of security in their salvation or are they largely plagued by doubts?

Friends are made to constantly report on each other, and when they catch someone "stumbling" if the person was considered more mature than you, you are not allowed to question their findings. (There were signs up all through the dorm halls saying "Am I making sure everyone else is engaged in holy living?")

I don't understand the purpose of this. I thought MacArthur was careful to teach that God is the one who does all the saving and WILL make saved people be holy. Why is it up to everyone else to make sure this is happening? Why all the babysitting? How is this inconsistency explained?

most of your free time is spent serving the church or witnessing, mostly to other churches who do not accept Lordship Salvation.

That explains the lines I have heard where anywhere from 50-85% of the members of supposedly sound, Bible teaching churches are supposedly not really saved.

Quote
bjw

Quote
BraveHeart
What do you mean by "Lordship Commitment"?

& BJW
What part of the gospel message are you rejecting? Or maybe you could explane, what your understanding is of how people can be saved by God. The reason I say this, is in many churches people use phrases that end up having multiple meanings. I'm asking this in an effort to understand and have clarity.

This is a good example of what I was talking about. I do not reject any of the gospel because John MacArthur does not teach the gospel. It is a counseling cult that masquerades as Christianity, with a merit, works-based system in which one must do more and more, getting better and better all the time or else they are not saved.

BJW Im sure I now understand where you are coming from. That's like saying
"BJW, its so good to hear that you stopped beating your wife, kids & the dog and you stopped smoking pot."
I understand you are rejecting Jesus, because of something that happened at John MacArthur's church.

i find it dangerous to label individual churches as cultic. yes the evangelicals tend to elevate their spiritual leaders to a high status but that doesn't mean they have gone cultic for many of those leaders would and do refuse such promotion.

sometimes the leader gets too big a head and just needs a good head slap to help him regain his proper perspective. then in reading some of these posts, i wonder if those complaining abolut a church is just responding to a slight and wants to get even. i do not know much about MAcarthur but have seen him on larry king live and was not impressed with his answers but then toomany christian leaders play politics with their responses and do not present the truth in those interviews.

Quote
isitacult?
So we can take it that when MacArthur speaks like Free Grace men are heretics, what he means is that they are not saved men, not that they are saved but have fallen into serious error? That is truly amazing. I find it incredible that anyone could read Ryrie, or L.S. Chafer, or any of the early Dallas men and draw the conclusion that they are not saved.

Right, he feels that any free-gracers that are saved it is by accident because they are living lordship doctrine without knowing it.

Quote
isitacult?
You must constantly increase the abundance of these things and answer to a mentor, a "more mature Christian" (usually a small group leader or church appointed counselor that has paid thousands of dollars to the church to take "Nouthetic" counseling classes) who will evaluate how you are doing. Not doing enough (not topping your last progress) is grounds for discipline, or as they call it "stumbling." If you stumble over the same thing 3 times in a row you are shunned, or as they call it "treated as a pagan or a tax collector."

I would think this kind of set up would make a person's personal assurance of salvation, or lack thereof, to be largely dependent on the assessment of these mentors. That seems to give them an undue amount of power.

Do the people seem to have any sense of security in their salvation or are they largely plagued by doubts?

It was common for people to doubt their salvation. The guy living in the dorm room next to mine was having trouble sleeping nights because he was afraid he wasn't doing enough for the Lord. He even dumped his girlfriend and cut out most extra activities to serve the church to the point where he was burned out. Being in this group really is a depressing world view. They say it is "eternal security,' but it is only secure to the extent that you are constantly showing evidence, or else you may discover you were "self-deceived" and not saved.

Quote

Friends are made to constantly report on each other, and when they catch someone "stumbling" if the person was considered more mature than you, you are not allowed to question their findings. (There were signs up all through the dorm halls saying "Am I making sure everyone else is engaged in holy living?")

I don't understand the purpose of this. I thought MacArthur was careful to teach that God is the one who does all the saving and WILL make saved people be holy. Why is it up to everyone else to make sure this is happening? Why all the babysitting? How is this inconsistency explained?

These signs that were up were the invention of MacArthur's second-in-command Mark Tatlock and was typical of MacArthur's extreme interpretation of Matthew 18. It's all about evidence and constantly proving you have genuine saving faith. It is a very confrontation based system where it is common for people to call you out on things that you must repent of.

Quote


most of your free time is spent serving the church or witnessing, mostly to other churches who do not accept Lordship Salvation.

That explains the lines I have heard where anywhere from 50-85% of the members of supposedly sound, Bible teaching churches are supposedly not really saved.

It's surprising the amount of former Catholics they have. They spend a lot of time proselyting members from other churches, and in Bible studies it was common to hear people give testimony of how they were in a church that was teaching weak, watered-down salvation before coming to GCC. The statement you make here sounds typical of what they say about other churches.

Every year they send college students out on missions to help spread the doctrine during their two missions weeks (one per semester), so its not surprising that they've grown quite a bit since I was there.