If you think I’m saying the only way one can disagree with Catholic teaching is to be ignorant or hateful, then you misunderstand me. I don’t think that.

What I’m speaking of is some specific things he said in that sermon that was played on WOTM. He said things that were just flat-out untrue and inconsistent. I’m trying to be charitable by saying it was either ignorance or “topical insanity” that caused this and not dishonesty. I still think John MacArthur is trying to convey what he believes is true.

I don’t think I’ve set up a “false dilemma” at all.

What if it’s neither ignorance nor hatred but a conclusion to which he has come after examining the teachings of Rome versus the teachings of, say, Galatians in particular? Isn’t that a false dilemma, making good headway towards the drop in charity level you recently lamented? Setting up false dilemmas like you’ve done here usually qualifies as ‘uncharitable’, I should think.

Peace,
Rhology

I heard that, too, and lost the greater part of the respect I had for John MacArthur. Whether he spoke out of ignorance or was blinded by hatred, I can’t say as I don’t know his heart, I just gave him more credit than that. I thought a man in his position with his sphere of influence would be better educated or more prudent.

Whew!

Agreed, Jesus brought up Hell more than Heaven. While I think WOTM tactics are less than ideal, which is why I’ve brought up situations both common and uncommon to demonstrate why, I don’t think MY way is the only way. God works in many ways and through various people, WOTM included.

There are issues such as interpretation and justification where it’s obvious that a Catholic and a Protestant would and should respectfully disagree so it’s probably best to leave it at that.

That there would be a differences of opinion with regard to the approach and/or style of a particular ministry come as no surprise because of our different sensibilities. Healthy discussion is good so that we understand one another better even when we disagree in some areas. I’ve enjoyed the back and forth with you on this subject.

Scott

Perhaps a new or additional problem we are running into is that in some instances what is so obvious to you in your private interpretation simply does not resonate with us.

Maybe the problem here is that you think that WOTM is saying that their way is the only way. Not at all, but you seem to be saying that YOUR way is the only way and that their way stinks. Why not allow room for both? It’s not like one of your tortured souls for whom you express such concern will necessarily spend more than 10 minutes in their whole lifetime talking to one of the WOTM guys, right? They’ll spend far longer waiting in line for the next Rob Zombie CD…

never able to be good enough for what they perceive as a harsh and demanding God.

Honestly, this is ironic, coming from someone who believes (if you’re RC) that one can lose one’s justification, coming to someone who believes such is impossible (me, and WOTM too). Seems like it’d be th’other way ’round.

WOTM’s methods would be disatrous for people who suffer in that way and would cause them more anxiety and attempts at living a perfectionist lifestyle.

You don’t think that a WOTM agent ;-) would, if they discerned that, stop everythg and encourage the person on that very same topic? I think this is a bit of a smokescreen.

don’t hate God if they even believe in Him at all.

Fine, but the NT disagrees with you. I can’t help you if the NT doesn’t.

The underlying theme throughout this thread seems to be a Catholic vs. Protestant sensiblities.

Or Catholic vs biblical ones. I haven’t cited any Protestant distinctives (except just now [preservation of the saints] and you were the one who brought it up.

Peace,
Rhology

Yes, it is loving and of good intent to try rescue the person from a burning house. But here again prudence plays a role.

One can go in and try to use reason with the soap opera watcher, explain that there is a fire burning, the TV will soon be a moot factor as well as the house and her life while offering one’s hand to safety.

Or, with the same good intent but with less prudence…

One could go in and start screaming GET OUT NOW, FIRE!, WHO CARES ABOUT YOUR DUMB SHOW! GET OVER HERE, I’M GOING TO BRING YOU TO SAFETY. My guess is that the lady would likely resist, thinking the person crude and not be amenable to his suggestion. He might grab her anyway and while on the way out, struggling all the way, the lady’s head fatally smacks into the china cabinet.

Silly analogy, of course, but I was trying to stick with what you put on the table.

I’m sure there were psychologically fragile souls in Jesus’ day. The Lord, however, spoke to different people in different ways. To some He showed compassion, to others He was stern and to a few, performed miracles. My point is Jesus anticipated (more than we can, of course) where people were spritually at the time using wisdom and prudence which often require nuance. In my opinion, that’s the model through which we should evagelize others.

Yes, we should desire the unrepentant have the appropriate amount of fear with regard to the state of their souls and that it should mature into a healthy filial fear of not wanting to offend our Father out of love.

There are some people who are overly scrupulous, not quite sure they’ve repented enough if they fall again, just like we all do, and are never able to be good enough for what they perceive as a harsh and demanding God. WOTM’s methods would be disatrous for people who suffer in that way and would cause them more anxiety and attempts at living a perfectionist lifestyle.

I would think most of the secular folks and late night partiers WOTM mostly comes into contact with don’t hate God if they even believe in Him at all. At the point they come into contact with WOTM, they’ve probably been taught in school and at home that religion is outdated, etc. Confrontational tactics could easily push people like that farther away from God.

Christopher Hitchens, on the other hand, makes more sense with regard to your last sentence.

The underlying theme throughout this thread seems to be a Catholic vs. Protestant sensiblities.

I didn’t say “totally degenerate and reprobate”. I just quoted the New Testament.
James 4:4
1 Tim 1:9
Rom 3:10-12

Just FYI.

Some of us are of the thinking that it isn’t the case that those who have not yet come to faith are totally degenerate and reprobate - that inasmuch as the natural law written on the heart of man is a reality, our souls cry out to be completed and yearn for the True God and to be reconciled.

That as the case may be, those who through the Grace of reason and/or experiences of Christian love, might be on the cusp of embracing it… Well such in your face confrontation may well be the step that is NOT needed.