Megachurch Pastor John Macarthur: Denominations That Allow Gay 'marriage' Are 'satan's Church

Do you believe John MacArthur is correct?

  • YES! Churches that celebrate what God condemns as an immoral sin are apostate! And wrong!

    Votes: 12 80.0%
  • NO! Jesus told us to love our neighbor. How can we refuse to celebrate love?

    Votes: 1 6.7%
  • I have a different opinion that is more than a simple yes or no answer. (Please elaborate in a post)

    Votes: 2 13.3%

  • Total voters
    15
  • Poll closed .
#22
No, Jesus told us to hate our families or you can't be His disciple. He didn't say anything about their sins. There are many verses in the Bible telling us that we should, or that God does, hate certain people and certain kinds of people. There are no verses that teach the contrary, dishonest interpretation aside.

I point out what Jesus said as a rebuttal to those who lie and say God loves everyone, and that we should love everyone. (BTW, I've never known anyone who loves everyone. Why are people with bad doctrine always hypocrites?)
This is preposterous.
 
#25
No, Jesus told us to hate our families or you can't be His disciple. He didn't say anything about their sins. There are many verses in the Bible telling us that we should, or that God does, hate certain people and certain kinds of people. There are no verses that teach the contrary, dishonest interpretation aside.

I point out what Jesus said as a rebuttal to those who lie and say God loves everyone, and that we should love everyone. (BTW, I've never known anyone who loves everyone. Why are people with bad doctrine always hypocrites?)
:giggle: Oh, yes I recall our discussion on this...

Will you visit your unsaved parents? Will you help them if they sick? Will you feed them if they hungry?

If your answer is YES, then I don't care how you define 'hate'. We are in agreement on the bottom line.
 
#27
I don't know if I agree with John MacArthur that these churches are "Satan's Church," though if he just means they have fallen for Satan's lies, then yes, I agree with him.

It sounds friendly and welcoming to say "Y'know -- we are all God's children and we must accept those who only mean to live a loving life with their partners, whether gay or straight." And I honestly believe many of those who hold this position (like the Episcopal Church for example) probably really do mean to be charitable...but the problem is when it comes down to it, they aren't, even if they don't know.

The reason why we should reject same-sex marriage isn't because it grosses us out or we because we think the majority of gay people are pushing for an anti-Christian agenda. Those points really aren't important at all. The reason why we should reject same-sex marriage is because we simply don't have the authority to condone it. Even if we want to condone it, it's not our place. We can't overstep what God has instructed when dealing with the sanctity if marriage. And there is a reason for it too -- it's not some rule out of left field which we can't understand.
 
#29
I don't know if I agree with John MacArthur that these churches are "Satan's Church," though if he just means they have fallen for Satan's lies, then yes, I agree with him.

It sounds friendly and welcoming to say "Y'know -- we are all God's children and we must accept those who only mean to live a loving life with their partners, whether gay or straight." And I honestly believe many of those who hold this position (like the Episcopal Church for example) probably really do mean to be charitable...but the problem is when it comes down to it, they aren't, even if they don't know.

The reason why we should reject same-sex marriage isn't because it grosses us out or we because we think the majority of gay people are pushing for an anti-Christian agenda. Those points really aren't important at all. The reason why we should reject same-sex marriage is because we simply don't have the authority to condone it. Even if we want to condone it, it's not our place. We can't overstep what God has instructed when dealing with the sanctity if marriage. And there is a reason for it too -- it's not some rule out of left field which we can't understand.
Absolutely.

This is NOT our domain to say yea or nay. What fallen nations call tradition is rubbish to us.

We know they are blind leaders of the blind. The ditch awaits. We can only say don't fall into the ditch. If they hear not, God's call then.

We counsel, we don't force.
 
#34
Not trolling. Biblical correctness rather than Political correctness.
Biblical context relative to the parables of Jesus is necessary in order to exercise Biblical correctness.

"Hate" in Luke 14:26 and that you are referring to is not defined as what contemporary American culture understands as hate by definition.

Jesus would be pretty inconsistent if in the prior verse in Luke he said this: But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, (Luke 6:27) And later told his disciples they have to hate their own family in order to be his disciples.

It is important I think to remember that while we're reading scripture in English language translation, the NT was actually written in Greek first.
And there is something then to be said for that old axiom; something lost in translation.

"Hate" as we read it in Luke 14:26 appeared in the original Greek to read as, miseo. (To love less)
Therefore, Jesus was telling his disciples that if they are to follow him, they must love the spirit of Christ and his teachings more than earthly things.
 
#38
"Hate" in and that you are referring to is not defined as what contemporary American culture understands as hate by definition.

Jesus would be pretty inconsistent if in the prior verse in Luke he said this: But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, () And later told his disciples they have to hate their own family in order to be his disciples.
You have no argument. If "hate" doesn't mean hate, then Jesus is misrepresenting the teachings of the OT (where it was a virtue to hate your enemies, even with the utmost hate!). If "hate" means to love someone, just less than we love God, then you're claiming Jesus is telling us to love our enemies more than God! And, if "hate" doesn't really mean "hate", how do you figure that "love" means love? That's three strikes for you from the single verse you quote in your defense.

The word Jesus used for hate is used about 42 times in the NT. So, we do have a very good understanding of what the word means, and does not mean what you say it means. Your only position is that you don't like what Jesus said so you're making up an excuse to dismiss it.

"Hate" as we read it in appeared in the original Greek to read as, miseo. (To love less)
NO! You don't get to make up the definitions of the words other people use!
 
#39
I saved a lot of time. Thank you Jesus.

I opened this thread after getting an alert of a new reply. And the first thing I read was your last accusation.

NO! You don't get to make up the definitions of the words other people use!


:LOL: I'll let others figure out why that statement is so darn funny! Hint: Strong's Concordance.

Thanks for coming.




You have no argument. If "hate" doesn't mean hate, then Jesus is misrepresenting the teachings of the OT (where it was a virtue to hate your enemies, even with the utmost hate!). If "hate" means to love someone, just less than we love God, then you're claiming Jesus is telling us to love our enemies more than God! And, if "hate" doesn't really mean "hate", how do you figure that "love" means love? That's three strikes for you from the single verse you quote in your defense.

The word Jesus used for hate is used about 42 times in the NT. So, we do have a very good understanding of what the word means, and does not mean what you say it means. Your only position is that you don't like what Jesus said so you're making up an excuse to dismiss it.



NO! You don't get to make up the definitions of the words other people use!
 
#40
I saved a lot of time. Thank you Jesus.

I opened this thread after getting an alert of a new reply. And the first thing I read was your last accusation.

NO! You don't get to make up the definitions of the words other people use!


:LOL: I'll let others figure out why that statement is so darn funny! Hint: Strong's Concordance.

Thanks for coming.
Hint, Strong's Concordance also doesn't get to make up the definition of the words other people. But, Strongs hardly supports you. Strong's directly defines the word that Jesus used as "to hate, pursue with hatred, detest." Strong's merely offers that some interpreters add the definition of "love less, to postpone in love" (you're not alone in compromising the truth because you don't like what the Bible says), but this is not Strong's own definition.

Your logical error of appealing to authority falls flat.