Thus Says...Who?

In recent years there's been a surge in the popularity of some pastors. In some church circles one can barely take two steps without hearing something about Mark Driscoll or John Piper. I think this is mostly thanks to the internet.

So while people have said this before, I feel a need to say it myself. I'm concerned that, if it hasn't already, the church will become more focused on these pastors and their words (among other things) than on Jesus and the Bible.

Let me just give a slightly absurd yet true example. I saw a desk given away on Facebook, and the big selling point was that it was once owned by Mark Driscoll. Now, this was a really nice desk by its own merit. It didn't really need the Mark Driscoll history added to it. But that's the general reason people paid it so much attention, not because it was actually a really nice desk. I later got the chance to see it myself; it's bigger than our kitchen (I've taken to calling it the Driscoll desk).

Now, I'm not criticizing Driscoll or Mars Hill. I think they do good things. But in my age group one witnesses the general hysteria around this guy and his church more often than hysteria around anyone else. I guess my question is this: shouldn't someone be judged by his or her character rather than by what church he or she attends? Just because someone attends Mars Hill, or Bethlehem Baptist, or The Village, doesn't mean they're saved, or better than anyone else, or even have good character.

What About MacArthur?

I don't know if anyone will say this, but I feel like I should address this anyway. One of my biggest heroes of the faith is John MacArthur. I've found him to be very faithful, Biblical, and he doesn't pull any punches. I listen to his radio show, have some of his books, read his blogs, and even have an online version of his study Bible. Shouldn't I be careful and discerning about all that?

If someone asked me that, my answer would be an emphatic "Yes."

Now, I've listened to MacArthur and followed along with his studies enough to know that he's a very trustworthy and Biblically sound man. Because I know he's trustworthy, I've also been willing to listen to him Biblically defend doctrine I wasn't sure about. We don't agree on absolutely everything, which is probably good because it means I'm not a MacArthurite. But I still have to be discerning of his teaching, because no matter how trustworthy a man is, he's still human and subject to mistakes. That's how we need to view and treat all teaching that claims to be Biblical (Acts 17:11).

So where does the priority lie: the Bible and what it says, or the pastor, what he says, and his fame? They aren't always mutually exclusive, but shouldn't we be discerning as to whether or not what a pastor says is Biblical, no matter how good of a reputation he has?

P.S. If ever given the opportunity to get a desk formerly owned by MacArthur, I probably wouldn't go for it because it would likely be in Southern California. But if it were here, I'd have to see it myself to figure out if it's any good, or whether or not it even would fit in our door.