John MacArthur Urges Christians Not to Support Religious Freedom: ‘I Won’t Fight for Idolatry’
(Christian Post) While studies show most Americans support religious freedom as a core component of American cultural values, Pastor John MacArthur of Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, California, said he doesn’t support it because it allows idolatry.
During his State of the Church address Wednesday, which replaced his Shepherds’ Conference for men in church leadership that was postponed due to “ongoing litigation” and “threats” from the state, MacArthur urged evangelicals to stop forming alliances with non-Christian groups to promote religious freedom because they don’t need it.
“The Gospel offends the sinner and seeks to break the sinner’s comfort and contentment by bringing him into stark realization of the eternal judgement of God. Evangelicals have become like Peter. They are looking for alliances with Satan that they think somehow can aid the Kingdom,” MacArthur said.
“I told our congregation a few weeks ago that I could never really concern myself with religious freedom. I wouldn’t fight for religious freedom because I won’t fight for idolatry. Why would I fight for the devil to have as many false religions as possible and all of them to be available to everyone?”
The megachurch leader, who has famously challenged local government and state officials over the right of his congregation to have in-person services during the coronavirus pandemic, noted that even with religious freedom Christians have continued to be the target of “the hostility of sinners.”
“Well, people would say that’s a terrible thing to say. What about Christianity? Christianity advances whether there is religious freedom or not. And there’ll always be religious freedom for all the lies. Every false religion is going to be free because it’s linked to the kingdom of darkness that operates in the world. And Christians, whatever the label of religious freedom might be in its broadest sense, Christians are always the target even with religious freedom, of the hostility of sinners.”
To continue reading, click here
Editor’s Note. This article was written by Leonardo Blair and published at the Christian Post. Title changed by Protestia.
About Author
This is right. John MacArthur is correct in his assessment. The apostle Paul told the Corinthians that even “he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord’s freeman.” Even if we are subjected to complete slavery, we are free in Christ to serve Him to the fullest extent we are able. Religious freedom has become a guise and a code word for liberty to live like the world, but claim the name of Jesus Christ. It is time Christians began boldly and consistently living for Christ and proclaiming His sacrifice, and victory over death which alone can satisfy the wrath of God on our behalf!
MacArthur has a point with this. No one is even considering that muslims, new agers, satanists, or “progressive” denominations shouldn’t have complete freedom. They’ve moved in and set up camp under “religious freedom.” But they needn’t bother with exalted claims of freedom. They’re not in any danger. But I’m still not ready to toss the first amendment.
Not sure if I can track well with MacArthur on all of this. It’s obviously not a good idea for Christians to join in with non-Christians on this issue and make joint statements. However, this whole concept originally had to do with the government not imposing their version of Christianity onto the populous. In other words, a state religion.
It should be obvious to anyone paying attention that many in the Democratic party want to take away the tax-exempt status of any Christian churches who preach morality based on biblical teaching. This would include anything to do with homosexuality, fornication, beastiality, transgenderizm, marriage, etc. It would also include the prohibition of proclaiming that there is only one way to God through Christ. Criminal and civil penalties would be applied using “hate speech” legislation against anyone that strays outside of the state approved Christian teachings. This is basically going back to the days of Christian state churches or denominations in much of Europe that our freedom of religion laws protected against.
This is the Democratic party’s version of what China wants to do with Christian churches, except they want to push everyone towards a United Methodist or Universalist version of a Social Justice promoting “church”.
I get the part that the Church of Christ will grow no matter the obstacles, but to step aside while the left wants to drag the name of Christ through the mud and deceive the nations with their state authorized version of a false “christian” church, while true churches are persecuted under the thumb of the state, does seem a bit counter-intuitive for MacArthur.
It would be one thing if the Democrats and their supporters wanted to promote Buddhism and were against everything called Christian. However, that is not the case. They want to hijack Christianity and create an acceptable version that advances their ideology… while persecuting the non-compliant. Freedom of religion is designed to prevent this, but apparently MacArthur considers this protection idolatry?
Our small indep. church is not a 501c3 corp/gov controlled church or a member of any nati. assoc/council./gen assembly. We are indep of others incl gov. , all church property is tax exempt. anyway. When churches were set up tin New Test. they were all indep. of each other in running their church. The 501c3 was bait by the Johnson act in ’54 to gain control over churches over time. Time to break loose from it and keep gov. out of the churches and pastors muzzled. Home churches another option and reading puritan sermons in groups (online avail.).
This is skewed reasoning. Our Forefathers wrote what they wrote to guarantee that we could practice our Christianity free from government imposition. So, why did MacArthur even bother to defy the government by holding church services during the pandemic if this is his reasoning? Was it not IDOLATRY?
JMac is correctly defining “religious freedom” as an environment of religious pluralism. He is saying that Christians should not support the right of Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Taoists, atheists, etc., to advance their anti-God beliefs. When the founding fathers wrote about religious freedom, they were expressing their belief that there should not be a state system such as had existed under the Church of England. They were ensuring that the Anglicans/Episcopalians would not become the “official religion” of America as over against the Baptists.
Once again, John MacArthur leads the way for real conservative Christendom. “Religious freedom” is a term used by non-Christians, much like tolerance. It’s actually a fake truce. I will not tolerate cultural marxism and neither should you. I stand with MacArthur.