Disagreeing with John MacArthur

I know what the title leads you to expect, so let me say right off: I'm not saying whether I do or whether I don't. If you think you can read between the lines as to what my opinion is — please, don't. That really isn't what this is about.

As most of you will know by now, John MacArthur is issuing an edition of his Study Bible using the most recent NIV text. You can read the announcement here.

First, notice that the post is written by one of my very favorite non-related people in the entire world: Phil Johnson. Not by Frank, not by me. If you think that's silly to point out, I've already talked with folks who refer to that as the announcement "by the Pyro boys," or words to that effect.

Second — and sorry if you know this already, I keep thinking everyone knows it, and keep finding out that I'm wrong: of the Pyromaniacs bloggers, only Phil Johnson works at Grace Community Church. Frank and I have no business relationship with John MacArthur, and no immediate dog in this immediate hunt. Though if you think MacArthur's endorsing TWTG made me feel indebted for the rest of my natural life, you'd be right. It was incredibly gracious of him, he in no way had to do it, and that he'd trouble himself to give a boost to a book about the Gospel by a nobody sets him apart in my mind from many others.

Also be clear, I'm not saying that to distance myself from John MacArthur. It'd be an honor to be associated with him. I'm just not. I say it to make sure nobody blames me on him, not the reverse.

So I think I can speak fairly objectively, here.

Third, if you feel compelled to disagree with MacArthur's decision to do a MSB in the NIV, have at it. You're free. I know, you didn't need me telling you that; but for what I'm about to say, I just want to be crystal clear. I'm pretty sure MacArthur would say the same.

But...

Fourth, don't forget that it's possible to disagree with a decision without putting on a turban and becoming a mind-reader and a heart-judger. The ability to search the hearts and minds is a Divine attribute (1 Chron. 28:9; Rom. 8:27; Heb. 4:12-13). Don't forget the distinction: He is Divine... and we are de branches. Union with Christ does not bestow omniscience.

All us fundy-types rain fire on the abuse of Matt. 7:1 to shield heresy and sin. But good heavens, don't forget that the verse means something, it precludes some sort of judgment. Isn't it the pretense of being able ultimately to judge others' hearts harshly that is precluded?

So...

Fifth, it seems to me that there's plenty here to discuss (if you choose to) without getting within a light-year of impugning John MacArthur's character.

The Bayly brothers, whom I love and value dearly, leapt immediately to accusing John MacArthur of being motivated by greed. I don't think I've misunderstood them; I challenged them for "insinuating" this sin, and they responded "I'm not insinuating, dear brother. I'm stating." Which is doubling-down, not denial.

To my mind, that is 'way out of line.

Doesn't a man earn anything, anymore? How many decades of service has John MacArthur put in without blemish or blot on his character? Can you say the same?

Am I saying that puts him above criticism? See above; already answered that one. But why the immediate leap in assuming that there can only be one possible explanation for his action — the one that nothing else that we know about him suggests?

So, look: the news came out that MacArthur had decided to do a study Bible based on a translation you hate. I get that. I think that, on balance, I pretty much hate aspects of the new NIV, too. Just to pick one particular, I have read the attempted rationalizations for pluralizing singulars in the Hebrew and Greek text. "Unconvinced" is 'way too pale of a word for where they leave me. Scoffing and snorting in derision is probably closer.

But Phil lays out a rationale (linked above) that is similar to my own about preaching: to wit, I feel free to preach anywhere where they don't try to censor me, other things being equal. And I have, and am glad I did.

Is this arguably like that? Bringing the same bonuses, and vulnerable to the same objections? Arguably, yes.

So: you disagree with MacArthur's decision. Fine. Do it. No problem.

But you have two theoretical paths you could take:

1. I think MacArthur made the wrong decision, and here's why that means his heart is given over to sin.
2. I think MacArthur, a good man who deserves my respect, made the wrong decision, and here's why I think the decision was bad.

Obviously, I think the first is a big mistake, and the second is not.

I try to practice what I'm preaching to you. When I've written about (say) Driscoll and MacDonald and Jakes and all, I've found no need to mind-read. Don't need to, don't want to. Dealing with their words and their choices and the evaluation and implications of both kept me plenty busy, and gave plenty of fodder for fruitful discussion. In fact, just between you and me and God, I'm perfectly and blissfully happy not to imagine I have Mark Driscoll's purported home-entertainment-system-from-God running in my head. What I see in my own heart is plenty dismaying and plenty occupying.

(The obvious difference is that intimations about MacArthur's character fly in the face of decades of faithful, unblemished service. It isn't merely beyond available evidence, it's wildly contrary to available evidence.)

And I'd commend a similar orientation to my friends who feel moved to find fault with the NIVMSB.

UPDATE: Phil Johnson supplies more corroborating facts and specifics, pointing away from any suspicions about John MacArthur's motivations.

UPDATE (of sorts) 2: Kevin DeYoung writes a good word in Don't Assume, which could read as a companion-piece to my plea above about Matt. 7:1, to wit: "don't forget that the verse means something, it precludes some sort of judgment. Isn't it the pretense of being able ultimately to judge others' hearts harshly that is precluded?"

Depression (bi-polar and otherwise) and jerkiness

I don't really have a feel for Mike Adams as a writer. He alludes to attending church; his bio says he's an ex-atheist and has an MA in Psychology; he publishes on Townhall, so he's some kind of conservative... but that's about it.

Adams just wrote You Aren't Bipolar, You're Just a Jerk! If you're interested in the topics of depression in general, or bipolar illness in particular, give it a read, then come back. If neither interests you, feel free to give this post a pass. But please read Adams first if you mean to read on here. (And btw, if you start, try to finish it — I think he takes a few unexpected turns.)

*** *** *** *** ***

All done? Welcome back.

I find Adams' post a maddening mix of the brilliant and the irresponsible. There are countless folks who really do need to read it, take it to heart, stop hiding themselves behind lame excuses, get the heck over themselves, and grow the heck up. They might also read this post, and get a clue.

But equally there are others who would read it, and simply be crushed and broken by his uncaring, ham-fisted, over-simplistic over-generalizations.

Remember: "Whoever sings songs to a heavy heart is like one who takes off a garment on a cold day, and like vinegar on soda" (Proverbs 25:20).

Also remember: "Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep" (Romans 12:15).

Bipolar? I don't understand "bipolar illness," the current name for what used to be called manic-depression. But I knew a sufferer very well, years ago, and weathered several cycles with this poor soul. I could not for the life of me draw the line between the "OK-(s)he-can-do-something-about-this" and the "only-medication-can-help." I'm pretty confident both are there — given the catatonic state I witnessed on the one hand, and the frenetic, days-without-sleep, on-cocaine-without-the-cocaine behavior.

Depression? I know depression a little better, more's the pity, because I've been there. I was there deeply, and for years. That was years ago, thank God, but the memory is as vivid as the monitor in front of my eyes. And I'm still more inclined to melancholy than its reverse. ("Full of angst" was a startlingly on-target observation a dear friend once made.)

During one particular extended period, I did everything Adams said. I gave myself for others, again and again and again. It made me feel more depressed and alone. I exercised, every day, sweat pouring off me. I prayed. I memorized.

Now, I can also tell you things I should have done differently. My point is neither that I was the helpless victim of an external force, nor that I even really fully understand what happened.

My point is that simplistic, hand-dusting, "There-that-ought-to-fix-it" formulas (when presented in that manner) probably do more harm than good.

People are different. (Deep, eh? I'm full of stuff like that. It just flows.)

I can prove it.

Look at Ezekiel and Jeremiah. Totally different temperaments.

Look at Nehemiah and Ezra. Totally different temperaments. (Further, check this post.)

Look at Johns MacArthur and Piper. These worthy, productive, God-loving gents were being interviewed at a conference. Piper mentioned a period of depression he had gone through that had lasted years.

Pause.

"Years?" came MacArthur's incredulous question.

See, these men are just put together different. MacArthur simply cannot imagine being down or blue for that long. It isn't in his makeup.

But obviously Piper can. And obviously I can. For myself, I wish I were more like MacArthur than Piper in this regard. But ah, well. I am what I am, and that's what I need to deal with.

Obviously this could be a very long post, and it isn't going to be. I'll just close with a few thoughts.

1. A depressed person should talk with his pastor. He should read Scripture. He might check out Lloyd-Jones' Spiritual Depression. He could try what Adams suggests, all of which are good ideas as far as they go.
2. If those measures, undertaken seriously and prayerfully and with persistence, don't address it, maybe it's something else.
3. People trying to help depressed people should study Scriptures about patience, longsuffering, and compassion. They should eschew simplistic quick-fixes. What worked for you may not work for someone else; if it doesn't, it doesn't mean you're better than someone else.
4. Remember, identical symptoms can have totally different causes. Here's Bob. Bob says he is a Christian. Bob is plagued with guilt. What to do? Simple, right? Tell him the blood of Jesus covers all his sins, he's saved by grace, leave it at the Cross, and move on, right? Right — unless Bob is plagued with guilt because he is walking in known, unrepented sin; unless Bob is shaking his fist in God's face every day. In that case, Bob doesn't need comfort. He needs repentance. He may even need to become a Christian.

So, was this post everything I can say about depression?

No sir, no ma'am.

It was just a few thoughts provoked by Adams' column.

Now, discuss.

UPDATE: there is now a re-posted companion-piece over at Pyro.

So, what phone should I get?

My dear wife, who is the financial brains of this enterprise, has determined that we need to move to AT&T. That part isn't up for discussion.

What is up to discussion is the titular question.

If I were (A) an important person who (B) had friends who called me frequently and (C) important dates because I was (D) in-demand, something like a BlackBerry would be readily justified. But none of those things is true to that degree.

I don't play phone-games; I don't ever want to use idle time that way. I'd rather put it to some sort of practical use. For instance, I'd love a phone that made it easy to do memos. I often am struck with an idea while I'm driving or walking. There's no convenient way to write a note. So I forget. If a phone had an easy way to record a memo, that'd be useful.

I rarely text, but sometimes do. Frank Turk (who is far too busy and important to frequent this blog or elevate its metas) has mad cell phone skills. He is able to text like a teenager (that's a compliment — to him, not to teenagers). But wait! There's more!

Once, when he and Phil and I were together, Frank used his phone to get the address and service times of a church we wanted to invade. It was amazing. (He was talking to someone named "Chloe." What was that about?)

That would be fun to do, but I don't know that I need to do it, as my life now is. But I did recently see this video (forget where) on using OliveTree Bible software on... I think it was an I-phone thingie. It was pretty impressive. (Hm... wonder if they need reviewers?)

So that would be cool, too.

All that to say this: what are your recommendations, opinions, news-flashes, tips, and otherwise-helpful-thoughts?

Question: parental internet locks, etc.

We're thinking of some furniture and pc rearrangement that has us considering parental-lock software or solutions. The pc will move to another room, and we're thinking proactive.

Any of you have experience, warnings, recommendations about the various softwares available?