New Warhorn Media post by Tim Bayly:
New Warhorn Media post by Tim Bayly:
A small aside, but is your brother ever going to contribute to any more Warhorn article writing? His writing is helpful.
I wouldn’t hold my breath. It’s never been for any lack of effort on my part to encourage him, but I’ve pretty well given up on it. Love,
John MacArthur has nothing on Australia’s Hillsong movement when it comes to money. In Sydney the main church is nicknamed “The Till On The Hill” and I know from having visited services in two local church plants that money will always get more than a mention. Hillsong’s Pentecostal forebears did (and do) stress tithing, but that was, and is, out of the conviction that such is Biblically mandated.
@ARobb may be interested in commenting further on this.
Keep your eye on the ball. Money is the explanation for John turning his back on the orthodox doctrine of Scripture. Money led him to begin to hawk the neutered Bible version. Stop and think about that. God gagged at the point of His inspired words concerning sexuality, and now no one thinks this bowdlerization of God’s Word is sin. John’s greed led him to twist the Church of Jesus Christ into false doctrine, a twisting in which he is now fully successful. John MacArthur, promoter of false doctrine. John MacArthur, gagger of God’s words. If anyone finds anyone anywhere in the English-speaking world giving even a single warning against this sin of John, I’ll eat my hat. In fact, if any of you have ever said anything publicly rebuking MacArthur and his fanboys for this, I’ll eat my hat. Love,
This is just so strange that no one brings this up. I wasn’t even aware that they we’re putting his notes with a liberal translation. There seems to be a real disconnect as his associates are all on conservative podcasts and John is known for taking stands for truth. Why go and use the new NIV? Was it just for reach? For money? I wonder what the study notes on those liberal passages say? And isn’t GTY putting out a new Bible translation? It just seems me weird that no one called him so far in the translation stuff.
Strange? This is how entertainment works. Did you think conservative podcasts are working for men to fear God and tremble at His words?
I remember when this first happened. I also have a vague memory of Phil Johnson writing a sarcastic comment somewhere (on the blog?) about MacArthur being accused of loving “filthy lucre”. And then Bayly Blog was removed from the sidebar.
In fact this may have been how I first became aware of proto-Warhorn.
Phil Johnson gets paid a lot of money to do what he does.
I didn’t mention that stupid story John tells about standing on the Memphis motel room toilet after the murder of Martin Luther King Jr. They asked Iain Murray if he’d corroborated any of the facts before he put it in his bio and Iain responded, “Uh, well, ummm, errr.”
The old black civil rights leader said it didn’t happen.
It shows the power of money. Who would have ever expected that John Macarthur would support gender-neutered Bible translation! I doubt you could have gotten him to do it using media criticism, or even hot pincers. But money is more subtle, and more of a trap for those who think they’re strong. The sun removes more coats than the wind does.
MacArthur’s pay and perks put him up there with all the charismatic prosperity preachers he criticizes.
Touché. I remember years ago, seeing an exposé on TV of one prosperity/WoF teacher, and thinking: Luther started the Reformation for less.
For the record, the late Steve Hays of Triablogue wrote two entries about the controversy over MacArthur’s pay and perks. Hays shied away from accusing MacArthur of anything, but did raise the question of consistency: if it’s wrong for charismatic preachers to live large, why shouldn’t it also be wrong for MacArthur?
Hays always had something of an axe to grind against MacArthur because of MacArthur’s strong cessationism, which Hays would pick apart and criticize. I often found his criticism helpful.