Why Pastor John MacArthur is wrong about religious freedom

Dr. John Macarthur recently spoke in opposition to religious freedom. As a pastor in California and a graduate of The Masters Seminary, this is a very rare instance where I disagree profoundly with Dr. MacArthur.

The keen observer will notice an immediate problem with the soundness of the middle premise: Religious liberty does not, in fact, promote false religion. Religious liberty does not promote religion any more than gun companies promote suicide by making guns that are routinely used by individuals to commit suicide. Being against suicide by gun no more requires that you oppose gun companies than being against idolatry requires that you oppose religious liberty.

Religious liberty is the view that citizens should be free to make individual decisions in regard to lawful worship (i.e. whether they worship, what they worship, and how they worship) and that such decisions should be governed with equal protection under the law. Religious liberty implies the inherent religiousness of humans; a position found in the Bible (Ecc. 3:11) that dates back to Cicero and was popularized most recently by Mircea Eliade’s notion of homo religiosus (e.g. that humans are religious by nature).

What about MacArthur’s claim that Christianity has flourished without religious freedom and that Christians don’t need any help from government? Well sure, Christianity doesn’t need any help from Utility Companies, either, but I am guessing Grace Community Church is kept cool in the summer and warm in the winter thanks to Southern California Edison (or some other provider). It simply doesn’t follow that if something is not needed that something is not good.

In fact, as Jonathan Edward says: God ordains the ends and the means. Historically, religious freedom has often been the means by which Christianity has flourished. Rome allowed religious practices that were not perceived to threaten the Empire. In fact, early Christian apologists like Justin and Athenagoras wrote letters to the Emperor arguing, in fact, that Christianity should be one of the religions allowed to be freely exercised in Rome. In effect, they were arguing for religious liberty.

Christianity can spread in China, where Xi Jinping has cracked down on religious freedom. It can also spread in South Korea, where religious liberty is a constitutional right (see Articles 11 and 20).

MacArthur thinks that religious freedom amounts to the promotion of false religion, but this is empirically false. Many false religions have diminished and died in the marketplace of religion where the free exchange of religious ideas and religious competition have corresponded to the growth of Christianity. Again, religious liberty in Korea has corresponded to the meteoric rise of Christianity and the decline of Buddhism in Korea over the same time period.

I suspect a theological argument will have the most positive impact on MacArthur and on those who respect him (a group of which I strongly consider myself to be a part, in fact). Having critiqued MacArthur’s argument, allow me to offer my own:

God is free, and his freedom is expressed in absolute consistency with His character and will.

Human freedom is a good thing when practiced in consistency with God’s character and will by the power of the Spirit.

Religious freedom provides an environment for the free practice of religion consistent with God’s character and will by the power of the Spirit.

Notice that my argument is not that religious freedom is necessary. But something can be unnecessary and still be good. Again, church buildings are not necessary for the faithful practice of Christianity, but they are good. Christian universities and seminaries, such as are owned and operated by Grace Community Church where MacArthur is pastor, are good but unnecessary.

Notice also that my argument seeks to connect human freedom to image bearing. Regardless of the theory of freedom that you hold, humans are meant to be free as opposed to whatever you consider to be the opposite of freedom. For instance, a Christians lives freely under the Lordship of Jesus if their will and affections are aligned with God and His purposes in Christ. Religious liberty is something Christians should support because God desires free worship, regardless of your theory of freedom.

Religious freedom is also implicit in Scripture (Mark 9:38-41 and Mark 13:34-3). In these passages Jesus says (speaking of a person engaged in false religion) “Don’t stop him”; and speaking of false religion in a religiously pluralistic society, Jesus says “Let them grow together until the harvest.” As a committed pre-millennial dispensationalist, Dr. MacArthur should recognize the importance and application of these (and other) passages to the church in the age preceding the coming of the heavenly Kingdom. For it is only after this point that there will be only one religion practiced on a new earth where Christ Himself reigns bodily.

- Adam Groza (Ph.D.) is Vice President of Enrollment and Student Services and Associate Professor of Philosophy of Religion at Gateway Seminary. He is the author of Faith Wins: Overcoming a Crisis of Belief (New Hope, 2020) and a contributing author to Idealism and Christian Philosophy (Bloomsbury Academic, 2016). He serves as a research fellow for the ERLC and a teaching fellow for the Agricola Theological Institute.

In all human history there has been only one country whose form of government was received from Heaven. It did not have "religious freedom."

"Religious freedom" is based on the false idea that all religions are based on faith and there is no way whatsoever for a person to know with certitude which is true. This is incorrect. However, since said religion is not chrstianity, no one wants to hear it.

The only practical excuse for religious freedom is the idea that if a person is going to practice a false religion, let it be his own fault rather than that he was forced to. However, it is a matter of Divine Law that after the Revelation at Sinai, all new religions, religious holidays, religious rituals, and religious beliefs are forbidden.

As stated in the prior thread, John MacArthur: ‘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"] in which Pastor MacArthur said ,

Pastor MacArthur

this means that Pastor MacArthur - as well as Christians in North Korea etc. if he is correct - can only support freedom of speech and assembly under a theocracy he agrees with, and since he cannot support the allowance of preaching error then this would not simply mean that the likes of JW's be forbidden to preach, but anyone else who he deems is preaching false doctrine. Thus under that gov. censoring all the Calvary Chapels, Assemblies of God, etc. would be required, versus an even playing field. That is where the logic leads and extends to stores and other venues.

Moreover, since the NT church is not constituted to use the sword of men to rule over the lost or enforce compliance with its doctrine, then Pastor MacArthur can only support support freedom of speech and assembly under a secular government that will only allow those who concur with him to preach, thus going back to Calvin's rule and the Puritans, and in principle concurring with the church of Rome which did the same.

We can be in the situation the NT church was (which is where we are headed), and which is what MacArthur actually offers as the alternative (while intending to"obtain appropriate constitutional and legal protections and further relief from the Court” to assemble). However, Pastor MacArthur's church has seen what can be done when we have a government that allows for freedom of speech and assembly (with its necessary limits) but as not requiring assent to theological beliefs, yet which state reflected overall Biblical morality in its laws, and was dependent upon the masses being overall greatly influenced by Biblical faith (thus being stable as controlled from within, not without).

And due to the mass declension from it we are now increasingly faced with a form of secular theocracy, requiring assent to its ever-morphing politically correct perversions of what God ordained and punishing dissent, thus resulting in the remnant contending for freedom of religion.What have we learned from Scripture and history?

Also while MacArthur correctly states “The Apostles turned the world upside down with no help from it. No social action. No alliances," they did not do so simply be preaching, but with many signs and wonders which MacArthur disallows as would his theocracy.

Meanwhile John MacArthur’s Shepherds’ Conference for men in church leadership, which was expected to draw some 3,000 attendees to the megachurch in Sun Valley, California, next month, has been postponed due to “ongoing litigation" and "threats" from the state....

“We will be deposing the key health officers and county officials and requiring them to answer for their oppressive actions under oath, and requesting all documents and information supporting their arbitrary attempts to restrict our religious liberty as a church. Our church leadership remains firmly committed to the truth that Christ is the head of the Church, and we will not yield to government's infringement upon the biblical command to worship and gather together,” the church continued. “We intend to steadfastly defend this truth and obtain appropriate constitutional and legal protections and further relief from the Court.” - https://www.christianpost.com/sponsored/are-you-woke-or-awake.html

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.