MacArthur defies late-night court order against indoor worship
A children's choir sings at Grace Community Church on Sunday morning, Aug. 16, in a service held in defiance of court orders enforcing a ban on indoor gatherings due to coronavirus.
Pastor John MacArthur on Sunday, Aug. 16, defied the mandate of the California Court of Appeal by holding an indoor worship service — further escalating a nationally watched fight over COVID-19 restrictions.
MacArthur, a prominent Calvinist preacher and author, has led his Southern California megachurch to defy public health orders of the city, county and state intended to curb the spread of coronavirus. He and the church’s elders have claimed the church is being persecuted by the government and will not bow to their illegitimate authority over the church.
MacArthur colleague Phil Johnson posted this to Twitter Sunday morning as the church was gathering indoors.
...
The powers that be tell the Chinese to kill their babies, does Watcher suggest that believers are to obey that command because that power is ordained of God? The powers that be in Muslim countries command you be one, are Christians supposed to obey that command because it it is from ordained powers?
Here is the command (no loopholes)
Forsake NOT the assembling of yourselves together.
But a Christian is to obey man more than God?
Read the context please
“For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:”
how is shutting down a church service not a terror to good works and a solace to evil. Remember if they do this to one congregation regardless of beliefs they will be able to do to all.
The passage clearly says DO THAY WHICH IS GOOD and you will have praise not persecution of the same.
the Bible is clear, I am sorry but as far as I can see brother Watcher is not.
Jim Lincoln wrote: --- Snippet from a rather detailed article. One can only pray this matter is not settled by congregants coming down with covid-19 âť— đź‘Ž
It's likely the concern the governor has is they won't come down with it, not that they will. So preventing that possibility from happening requires court intervention. As MacArthur has pointed out, the California death rate does not support the prevention of church meeting. No medical reason exists, but political ones do. And as you know, Jim, politics should be kept out of church.
"...In a decision issued late Saturday, the California Court of Appeals set aside a lower court order that would have legally allowed indoor services to take place at Grace Community Church on Roscoe Boulevard...."
https://tinyurl.com/yxjxblm7
Snippet from a rather detailed article. One can only pray this matter is not settled by congregants coming down with covid-19 âť— đź‘Ž
Watcher wrote: "How long will the fable of Romans 13 be perpetuated?" Fable? How sad. Rebellion has drawn many away from the inerrancy of Scripture.
Whatever you do, DO NOT connect the dots. You might actually learn that the "minister of God" is NOT civil government and "that day" was the day of the Lord's vengeance. Love and cling to the fable for you have far too much invested in it to give it up. I'm sure that's what God would want you to do.
Lurker wrote: Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: Acts 15:14-16 All the sinners of my people shall die by the sword, which say, The evil shall not overtake nor prevent us. *In that day* will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old Amos 9:10-11 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18)
Scripture interpreting Scripture through the citations of prophets of what happened "In that day", renders the fable of Rom 13 defensless by connecting those dots and those figures. What's sad is no one is willing to put effort into turning a page or a quick search to see what God said through using citations with an open heart to put it to the test. But if a commentator said it....take it to the bank. That is what's truly sad.
Humility is a most fickle attribute. The instant one finds it, it vanishes.
How long will the fable of Romans 13 be perpetuated?
Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: (Acts 15:14-16)
All the sinners of my people shall die by the sword, which say, The evil shall not overtake nor prevent us. *In that day* will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old (Amos 9:10-11)
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18)
For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. (Romans 13:4)
For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. (Romans 7:9)
ute1 wrote: Watcher: Your love is underwhelming. You put a poor construction on my words. I was open to conversation, but you want to shut it down. Who is stomping a foot? Who is disobedient? Who is meek? Who is humble?
I tend to change the channel when I come up against the brick wall of ignorance and pride. Please take it as you want. You and a host of others think it's okay for a Christian to tell the gov't what to do, and a few of those like me believe that Romans 13 needs to be adhered to.
You are stomping the foot in childish bull-headedness, and I am humbly trying to be obedient and submissive to bring Jesus Christ the glory He deserves. Sharpen your pitchforks or accept my opinion with love and understanding, it's your call. Have a good night.
I don't have enough room here to answer everything adequately, and I don't wish for this to carry on any further. I appreciated QC's response in humility and love, and I wish there was more of this in the church. Nonetheless, let's leave this up to our conscience's sake and you continue to stomp your foot in disobedience and I'll submit in meekness and humility and we'll see where it leads us.
May God be glorified in this and I hope and pray that at the end of this pandemic, the church shines bright as a loving and Christ-like witness and not as a bull-headed child.
I see no loopholes or backdoors here. I see a point-blank commandment to follow. Verse 5 says it all: you must be subject not only because of avoiding the wrath of God but also for your conscience's sake. I see no "ands, ifs or buts" here. If we start interpreting the Bible according to what WE think it should be saying, we run into trouble and will be judged accordingly.
Dear Brother, We are called to reason and wisdom when applying the scriptures. Otherwise we will end in absurdity, and may even deny the faith as the cults do.
I think your answer is a cop out. Have you no answer to my scenario? What of Buckeye’s point? Does a child or a wife have no right to self-protection if the sphere of authority they are under is delinquent in its responsibility? Of course they do. Every sphere of authority must keep its place. Why? Because all authority is derived. Only God’s is absolute. The State is not my absolute just as my parents are not my absolute. Because all authority is derived authority it must fulfill its God given purpose and keep its place. God gave me a life, not the state, not the church, not my parents. God. I am responsible to God first.
Romans 13 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
I see no loopholes or backdoors here. I see a point-blank commandment to follow. Verse 5 says it all: you must be subject not only because of avoiding the wrath of God but also for your conscience's sake. I see no "ands, ifs or buts" here. If we start interpreting the Bible according to what WE think it should be saying, we run into trouble and will be judged accordingly.
(TMC) @Watcher So if your Governor General started making legislative decrees, in clear violation of your Constitution, you would not complain, and any who did would be in sin?
God does not give unlimited power to any man- not to a Father, Pastor, or Civil Ruler. If a Father cruelly abuses his son, does the son have the right to defend himself and seek redress and safety? Or would that be a sinful violation of the flat commands to honor and obey one’s parents?
Watcher wrote: I guess the point is, who has given you the right to judge? You're only responsibility is to obey.
I think God has given me more than the right to judge, He has given me the command to discern. And God has given me the command not to be apart of self-harm in the sixth commandment.
I have not sorted all this out, but I find your position most disturbing. For example, if a man rejects a mandatory vaccination because of concern about self-harm, is he in violation of God’s command in Ro 13? In this scenario, would you back him up or turn him in because the government says he is a health hazard?
Do we just believe and do as we are told by the government with no qualification? Is this the teaching of Ro 13? I hope not.
Help me understand. Where is the line? You say My ONLY responsibility is to OBEY? Am I obligated to self-harm? Do I believe them if they tell me something is for my own good when they give me solid reasons to mistrust them?
(BTW, I think that if JMac was not a 501c3 he would be on better ground to refuse to obey the mandate not to meet.)
Buckeyes wrote: (TMC) @Watcher It is not the law that is rotten- we have elected officials going rouge and discarding our laws. I don’t believe that aiding and abetting treasonous usurpation is in line with Romans 13.
It still doesn't matter. Again Americans are confusing the constitution and their so-called rights with being a Christian.
You are a Christian first and an American second, right? So be the Christian and be faithful to God by being submissive to the authorities that He put into power. Regardless of how rotten or corrupt they are, you have no right to rail on them any more than you have a right to complain about the weather. Both are controlled by God. To complain about the rulers and leaders God put into power is in fact complaining about God and admitting that He doesn't know what He's doing. Canada is rotten to the core, but I cannot complain or gripe about my leaders or I would be in essence complaining about God's choice in leaders. As long as we're not forbidden to preach Jesus then go along with the laws and mandates in love and patience.
(TMC) @Watcher It is not the law that is rotten- we have elected officials going rouge and discarding our laws. I don’t believe that aiding and abetting treasonous usurpation is in line with Romans 13.
Buckeyes wrote: (TMC) I think what MacArthur is doing here is right. (Now, they probably should have gone ahead with the masks and social distancing, but that’s IMO.) The situation in California is particularly egregious- it is against the executive orders for Christians to even hold small home Bible studies. And at the exact same time Churches were told not to sing, and given attendance caps lower than other public places, the Governor announced that there would be no restrictions whatsoever on mass BLM protests. The Executive Orders in most states are on shaky legal ground to begin with- but targeting Churches while specifically exempting other particular groups, is absolutely 100% illegal under the US Constitution. So who is really in violation of Romans 13, when elected officials are violating the Law of the Land that they swore before God and us to uphold?
I guess the point is, who has given you the right to judge? You're only responsibility is to obey. Of course, the law of the land is rotten, it's supposed to be. The world is antichristian and always has been. Rom. 13 is a flat command, not based on what sort of gov't we have.
(TMC) I think what MacArthur is doing here is right. (Now, they probably should have gone ahead with the masks and social distancing, but that’s IMO.)
The situation in California is particularly egregious- it is against the executive orders for Christians to even hold small home Bible studies. And at the exact same time Churches were told not to sing, and given attendance caps lower than other public places, the Governor announced that there would be no restrictions whatsoever on mass BLM protests. The Executive Orders in most states are on shaky legal ground to begin with- but targeting Churches while specifically exempting other particular groups, is absolutely 100% illegal under the US Constitution. So who is really in violation of Romans 13, when elected officials are violating the Law of the Land that they swore before God and us to uphold?
The Quiet Christian wrote: Amen to that, Brother Watcher! Sometimes, though, we have the calling to serve thru government service. Daniel and his three buddies were more like they were impressed into government service then volunteers, but the principles remain. For those called to serve or stand, may the Lord be with them. I think for MacArthur, he saw the handwriting on the wall and decided to step forward and stand up. Honestly, I've seen the frustration of other pastors with like mindsets, although not in California. There is a broader backdrop of Californian politics which is harshly anti-Christian. Everyone has his breaking point. My sense is that GCC hit theirs and said "Enough!" What makes GCC a special case is they are too large for the county to handle. Smaller churches would have been forced to knuckle under by now.
From my standpoint as an observer watching from afar, I see persecution coming, and it won't be pretty. There will be two camps of Christians: Those who stand firm for their rights and be trodden under as aggressors, and those who will quietly do the Lord's work and be martyred. The quiet martyr is always preferred in my opinion. Blessings.
COMMENTS 
locked 
System Notice
