Monday, January 17, 2022

John MacArthur: "Men Dressed Like Women"

Not many days ago, well-known evangelical pastor, John MacArthur, went public, perhaps worldwide, by calling on pastors today to stand with Canadian evangelical pastors by preaching for biblical sexual morality.  I noticed that he himself preached "Such Were Some of You but You Have Been Washed" from 1 Corinthians 6:9–11 on January 16, 2022, Sunday morning.  I'm sure that will be available soon on the Grace To You website.  In late December, Phil Johnson did an interview with John MacArthur and asked him what he thought about various issues in the news, including Covid, Totalitarianism, and the Antichrist.

MacArthur also said this in the interview:

Totalitarianism that is going to come will basically be imposed on us by Godless, Christ-hating, Bible hating, anti-Christian forces.  They may not be overt about that, but if you want to make sure that we are free to murder babies, and you want homosexuality to be acceptable, and you want to appoint people into high positions, who are men dressed like women, and if you want to protect transgenders and all of that, then you have a Godless agenda, you have a God-hating agenda. . . . They're not even trying to be hypocrites.  They are not trying to cover up.  I mean, how insane are you when you introduce someone called Rachel Levine and turn that guy into a four star general, who's acting like a woman, who's actually a man?  . . . How perverse is this culture, it's so far gone.

And he said more.  I agree with what he said, however, I want to talk about the root cause of such a result that MacArthur describes.

What was the start of the gender identity crisis, gender fluidity, and then transgenderism, what MacArthur describes as "men dressed like women" and "a guy who's acting like a woman"?  MacArthur assumes that we understand what it means to dress like a woman?  Do we?  Where does scripture show this?  What is the verse that tells us how women dress?

For decades, almost his entire time as a pastor, John MacArthur has often referred to 1 Corinthians 4:6, "not to think of men above that which is written."  In a recent question and answer, he said:

I have no authority. I don’t have authority beyond the Scripture. I can never exceed what is written, 1 Corinthians 4:6. To do that is to become, Paul says, arrogant, and to regard yourself as superior. I have nothing to say to you that puts any demand on you if it isn’t from the Word of God.

MacArthur's interviewer, Phil Johnson, wrote the following:

Let me say this plainly: It is a sin to impose on others any "spiritual" standard that has no biblical basis. When God gave the law to Israel, He told them, "You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you" (Deuteronomy 4:2). And, "Everything that I command you, you shall be careful to do. You shall not add to it or take from it" (Deuteronomy 12:32).

The same principle is repeated in the New Testament. In 1 Corinthians 4, Paul was rebuking the Corinthians for their sectarianism, saying "I am of Paul"; "I am of Apollos," and so on. His rebuke to them includes these words in 1 Corinthians 4:6: "I have applied all these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brothers, that you may learn by us not to go beyond what is written."

That is a good guideline for how we should exercise our Christian liberty: Don't go beyond what is written in Scripture.

Does the Word of God say what effeminate behavior is?  Does it tell us what is transgender?  In his interview with Johnson, MacArthur says that men are dressed like women.  This is where the downfall of the nation is.  This is why totalitarians will rise up to control Christians -- in order to protect the practice of men dressing like women.

Do women dress like men?  Men dress like women, when they do what?  Wear dresses.  That is female dress.  What do men wear?  They wear pants.

MacArthur wants a stand for gender distinctions.  That ship sailed a long time ago, when he capitulated on women's dress.  He's just now saying anything about it.  Why?  Because men are now wearing dresses.

I guess it's a strong stand against men in dresses.  I guess.  Does that seem strong to you?  Most men are still against that.  What is a strong stand in actuality is against women dressing like men. You're not going to hear that from John MacArthur,  because that very selectively, as the NASV says in 1 Corinthians 4:6, "exceeds what is written."  Since scripture doesn't say what female dress is, then women can dress about however they want.

Does it say what male dress is?

Evangelicals like MacArthur are way too late on the issue of gender distinction.  They gave up on it long ago.  Transgenderism directly relates to their capitulation and compromise with the world a long time ago.  Judgment begins with the house of God.

1 comment:

Darrell Wayne said...

Interesting perspective, and hard to argue against. Of course there is the question "who assigned different types of dress to the genders?" And of course it seems, culture is that answer. And even our God-less culture has to admit that they are not suggesting that "men" normally wear dresses....

So it seems the issue, and sin of it, may be more with the heart of the person inside the clothing more than the clothing itself. And that sin being their self-god-like gender reassignment, their rejection of their truly God-given gender (for whatever reason they come up with), they reject the Creator's design and intent.

I am with you that life, church and culture would be better if women wore dresses, but I personally don't see a strong scriptural basis for that to be a requirement. Men in dresses is a different story, that is culturally reversed. But honestly (if not sadly) it is not generally considered masculine for women to wear pants today (wise or not). "Is it a scriptural mandate?" is the question.

Despite the despicable influence of radical feminism that started the trend of women in pants, it would be a difficult life indeed if we were required to judge all cultural norms as Godly or not through deep historical research and ideological analysis rather than based on the plain scripture. With that said...

With the thought that cultural norms are what constitutes gender dress type, it is more difficult to argue against women in pants. After all, correct me if I'm wrong, men and women wore the same type of garments in biblical days, or did they? I have not looked into it. Perhaps the prohibition of cross dressing was related to monthly discharges, etc. But regardless of the intent of that particular command, it is clear from scripture that homosexuality and effeminacy are sin and that seems to go back to the heart's rejection of God's obvious design, and of course is worked out in sexual actions and what you wear.

One thing is for sure, it will take a person, or people who are committed to God and His Word, and moved by regeneration to abide in Christ - before any of this will change on a large or small scale.

I ran across your blog because today is a day when true believers (in America as well) will need to rely on the Lord and each other as persecution is crouching at the door. That fellowship and unity will likely be aided by a proper discerning of what are doubtful disputations and what are essential. Something the church as done poorly at discerning, in general. We have little time to get that right and start building the Kingdom- together.

Keep the faith, speak the truth in love, and do try not to go beyond the scriptures.