Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What's Inside the Trojan Horse? (John MacArthur)
Oneplace.com ^ | March 16, 2003 | John MacArthur

Posted on 05/03/2003 11:44:05 AM PDT by anncoulteriscool

What's Inside the Trojan Horse?

by: John MacArthur

By God's grace, I have been the pastor of the same church now for almost thirty-five years. From that vantage point, I have witnessed the birth and growth of menacing trends within the church, several of which have converged under what I would call evangelical pragmatism–an approach to ministry that is endemic in contemporary Christianity.

What is pragmatism? Basically it is the philosophy that results determine meaning, truth, and value–what will work becomes a more important question than what is true. As Christians, we are called to trust what the Lord says, preach that message to others, and leave the results to Him. But many have set that aside. Seeking relevancy and success, they have welcomed the pragmatic approach and have received the proverbial Trojan horse.

Let me take a few minutes to explain a little of the history leading up to the current entrenchment of the pragmatic approach in the evangelical church and to show you why it isn't as innocent as it looks.

Recent History

The 1970s, for the most part, were years of spiritual revival in America. The spread of the gospel through the campuses of many colleges and universities marked a fresh, energetic movement of the Holy Spirit to draw people to salvation in Christ. Mass baptisms were conducted in rivers, lakes, and the ocean, several new versions of the English Bible were released, and Christian publishing and broadcasting experienced remarkable growth.

Sadly, the fervent evangelical revival slowed and was overshadowed by the greed and debauchery of the eighties and nineties. The surrounding culture rejected biblical standards of morality, and the church, rather than assert its distinctiveness and call the world to repentance, softened its stance on holiness. The failure to maintain a distinctively biblical identity was profound–it led to general spiritual apathy and a marked decline in church attendance.

Church leaders reacted to the world's indifference, not by a return to strong biblical preaching that emphasized sin and repentance, but by a pragmatic approach to "doing" church–an approach driven more by marketing, methodology, and perceived results than by biblical doctrine. The new model of ministry revolved around making sinners feel comfortable and at ease in the church, then selling them on the benefits of becoming a Christian. Earlier silence has given way to cultural appeasement and conformity.

Even the church's ministry to its own has changed. Entertainment has hijacked many pulpits across the country; contemporary approaches cater to the ever-changing whims of professing believers; and many local churches have become little more than social clubs and community centers where the focus is on the individual's felt needs. Even on Christian radio, phone-in talk shows, music, and live psychotherapy are starting to replace Bible teaching as the staple. "Whatever works," the mantra of pragmatism, has become the new banner of evangelicalism.

The Down-Grade Controversy

You may be surprised to learn that what we are now seeing is not new. England's most famous preacher, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, dealt with a similar situation more than 100 years ago. Among churches that were once solid, Spurgeon and other faithful pastors noticed a conciliatory attitude toward and overt cooperation with the modernist movement. And what motivated the compromise? They sought to find acceptance by adopting the "sophisticated" trends of the culture. Does that sound familiar to you?

One article, published anonymously in Spurgeon's monthly magazine The Sword and the Trowel, noted that every revival of true evangelical faith had been followed within a generation or two by a drift away from sound doctrine, ultimately leading to wholesale apostasy. The author likened this drifting from truth to a downhill slope, and thus labeled it "the down grade." The inroads of modernism into the church killed ninety percent of the mainline denominations within a generation of Spurgeon’s death. Spurgeon himself, once the celebrated and adored herald of the Baptist Union, was marginalized by the society and he eventually withdrew his membership.

The Effects of Pragmatism

Many of today's church leaders have bought into the subtlety of pragmatism without recognizing the dangers it poses. Instead of attacking orthodoxy head on, evangelical pragmatism gives lip service to the truth while quietly undermining the foundations of doctrine. Instead of exalting God, it effectively denigrates the things that are precious to Him.

First, there is in vogue today a trend to make the basis of faith something other than God's Word. Experience, emotion, fashion, and popular opinion are often more authoritative than the Bible in determining what many Christians believe. From private, individual revelation to the blending of secular psychology with biblical "principles," Christians are listening to the voice of the serpent that once told Eve, "God's Word doesn't have all the answers." Christian counseling reflects that drift, frequently offering no more than experimental and unscriptural self-help therapy instead of solid answers from the Bible.

Christian missionary work is often riddled with pragmatism and compromise, because too many in missions have evidently concluded that what gets results is more important than what God says. That's true among local churches as well. It has become fashionable to forgo the proclamation and teaching of God's Word in worship services. Instead, churches serve up a paltry diet of drama, music, and other forms of entertainment.

Second, evangelical pragmatism tends to move the focus of faith away from God's Son. You've seen that repeatedly if you watch much religious television. The health-wealth-and-prosperity gospel advocated by so many televangelists is the ultimate example of this kind of fantasy faith. This false gospel appeals unabashedly to the flesh, corrupting all the promises of Scripture and encouraging greed. It makes material blessing, not Jesus Christ, the object of the Christian's desires.

Easy-believism handles the message differently, but the effect is the same. It is the promise of forgiveness minus the gospel's hard demands, the perfect message for pragmatists. It has done much to popularize "believing" but little to provoke sincere faith.

Christ is no longer the focus of the message. While His name is mentioned from time to time, the real focus is inward, not upward. People are urged to look within; to try to understand themselves; to come to grips with their problems, their hurts, their disappointments; to have their needs met, their desires granted, their wants fulfilled. Nearly all the popular versions of the message encourage and legitimize a self-centered perspective.

Third, today's Christianity is infected with a tendency to view the result of faith as something less than God's standard of holy living. By downplaying the importance of holy living–both by precept and by example–the biblical doctrine of conversion is undermined. Think about it: What more could Satan do to try to destroy the church than undermining God's Word, shifting the focus off Christ, and minimizing holy living?

All those things are happening slowly, steadily within the church right now. Tragically, most Christians seem oblivious to the problems, satisfied with a Christianity that is fashionable and highly visible. But the true church must not ignore those threats. If we fight to maintain doctrinal purity with an emphasis on biblical preaching and biblical ministry, we can conquer external attacks. But if error is allowed into the church, many more churches will slide down the grade to suffer the same fate as the denominations that listened to, yet ignored, Spurgeon's impassioned appeal.

Make it your habitual prayer request that the Lord would elevate the authority of His Word, the glory of His Son, and the purity of His people in the evangelical church. May the Lord revive us and keep us far from the slippery slope of pragmatism.

© Copyright 2003 by Grace to You. All rights reserved.


TOPICS: Charismatic Christian; Current Events; Evangelical Christian; General Discusssion; Mainline Protestant; Ministry/Outreach; Religion & Culture; Theology
KEYWORDS: evangelism; pragmatism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-71 last
To: CCWoody
Neither!

Contrarian....

61 posted on 05/07/2003 1:38:57 PM PDT by ksen (HHD,FRM - Entmoot or bust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody; P-Marlowe
Neither!

Ok, you're not saved because you believe. Does that mean you would argue that you believe because you are saved?

62 posted on 05/07/2003 1:46:30 PM PDT by ksen (HHD,FRM - Entmoot or bust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
I am not sure let me chew on that.

Let me know what you come up with.

63 posted on 05/07/2003 1:47:12 PM PDT by ksen (HHD,FRM - Entmoot or bust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; RnMomof7; anncoulteriscool; oldcodger
Where/what is "Saddleback?"

Is it "Willow Creekish?"

64 posted on 05/07/2003 1:53:10 PM PDT by Corin Stormhands (Entmoot 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
Saddleback is in California with the rest of the "fruits and nuts". It is a Southern Baptist Congregation (although they do not advertise that), pastored by Rick Warren. Yes it is a mega church as is Willow Creek. Rick Warren is the author of The Purpose Driven Church.
65 posted on 05/07/2003 2:30:02 PM PDT by Calvinist_Dark_Lord (" Ya don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Calvinist_Dark_Lord; Corin Stormhands
Saddleback is in Lake Forest, Orange County, and has a membership of over 15,000. Cozy.

fruits and nuts

But remember Lloyd Ogilvie also comes from California; he recently retired as U.S. Senate Chaplain and was the 23-year pastor of the First Presbyterian of Hollywood.

66 posted on 05/07/2003 4:33:13 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Calvinist_Dark_Lord; Dr. Eckleburg
Thanks. Wife and I visited Willow Creek a number of years ago...**shudder**

(and I say that being a member of a pentecostal mega-church)

67 posted on 05/07/2003 5:47:07 PM PDT by Corin Stormhands (Entmoot 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: ksen
I have considered the question..and here is my answer.

No one can not be saved without a basic understanding of the trinity.

One must know who Jesus is to be saved.  

  Mat 16:15   He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?      Mat 16:16   And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.   

  Mat 16:17   And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven

All "Christs" are not equal and all do not save, Having faith in a false Jesus profits nothing  

  Mar 13:21   And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here [is] Christ; or, lo, [he is] there; believe [him] not:   

  Mar 13:22   For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if [it were] possible, even the elect.

If the bible is true..Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God ...  

Kevin we can not have a perfect understanding of the trinity in this life..but we can know what scripture reveals throught the inspiration of the Holy Spirit . If it were not so the JW's and the Mormons would be saved by their jesus's and we could remove from the bible all the texts that refer to sound doctrine

68 posted on 05/07/2003 9:03:01 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: FactQuest
i'm sorry, i missed this post in the confusion on another thread.

As for Megachurches, I'm not so sure. MacArthur's church qualifies, don't you think? For that matter, so did the NT church in Jerusalem.

Aside from the daily temple service, i doubt that all of the members of the Jerusalem church gathered in the same place at the same time unless it was out doors. Simple matter of logistics that, where else in Jerusalem are at least 3,120 members going to gather? It is hard enough here in America in most church buildings.

While i do believe that the large congregation is going to pass away, i have nothing against large congregations! In my denomination, Fourth Presbyterian (EPC), Bethesda, MD has over 3,000, perhaps close to 4,000 members, but it is neither a Willow Creek nor a Saddleback! As long as the congregation is carrying out the mandates of the church, more power to it.

i didn't know about Stott, that is a new one for me.

69 posted on 05/07/2003 10:27:13 PM PDT by Calvinist_Dark_Lord (" Ya don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Calvinist_Dark_Lord; FactQuest
And I'll bet (or ask Bill Bennett to put down $20 for me) that there were no Hawaiian shirts in the Jerusalem church.
70 posted on 05/08/2003 12:07:22 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Calvinist_Dark_Lord
3120 Christians in Jerusalem... indeed, where could they meet? I suspect they could still meet in the temple, perhaps in the Court of the Gentiles. Or, outside... I hadn't really thought about that much, but it is interesting. I guess its likely they broke into smaller groups and met in various homes, right?

As for Stott, he grounds his belief solidly in the Bible. It's an interpretation issue, I don't think he first thought it unlikely that a loving God would punish sinners in Hell... I think he started with the scriptures, and let them reveal... yet came to a different conclusion. Our pastor brought him up once several months ago. So, I naturally had to do a mini-review of the issue myself. As one who is always ready to question traditional interpretations, I ended up being able to see both sides, and have ended up not knowing for sure. I throw this issue into my bucket of "disputable differences." Here is a pretty decent site, if you are interested in annihilationism.

http://www.biblicalanswers.net/annihilat.html
71 posted on 05/08/2003 6:07:00 AM PDT by FactQuest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-71 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson