John MacArthur died three months ago (July 2025) and the buzz concerning him and his ministry have waned. This is especially true in light of subsequent events such as the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
There were some voices of concern and criticism lodged regarding MacArthur, his ministry, and testimony, but overwhelmingly the assessments have been positive.
As I have previously written, I encountered MacArthur back in the mid-1990's when as a new Christian I was wrestling with my Fundamentalist upbringing and the errors of Altar Call-Decisionalism and the kind of faith it tended to produce. I had turned to the Scripture and was pleased to discover that system (which had for so long misled me) was in fact unbiblical. The Lordship Salvation controversy was still simmering and I benefitted from MacArthur's work and to this day remain somewhat baffled by those in Reformed circles that criticise him on this point - as if the notion of trust should exempt the forsaking of one's self, commitment of life, and surrender. The addition of these elements (it is argued by some) constitute a confusion of faith and works. There's plenty to critique about MacArthur, but on this point he was certainly correct.
For my part, I was always troubled by his adherence to Dispensational Theology and over time I became increasingly concerned by his attitude concerning wealth and his sense of privilege. He decried political activism but was in fact an activist for elements of the Establishment - for law enforcement, the military, Wall Street, and an increasingly extreme Right-wing political movement connected to both mammonism and policies of violence. With this came a troubling (and frankly revisionist) narrative concerning America's past and some of its more ugly aspects.
He seemed incapable of admitting error or considering possible misjudgment and this is demonstrated in his congregation's penchant to cover up abuse and in his stubborn persistence in standing by criminals - men who had been clearly convicted of crimes, men who had tried to gloss over and mislead regarding their deeds.
MacArthur's conduct during the Covid-19 episode was atrocious and un-Christian. As I have long argued the Christian response was not to simply bow to state dictates, but men like MacArthur were motivated by political commitments and such pastors fell quickly in line with the attempt to politicise the tragedy. Over a million Americans died, but men like MacArthur were defiant and in their defiance they brought down the hammer of the state. When the political winds shifted, to his shame, MacArthur filed a lawsuit against the state and won - costing the taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars. It was a disgrace.
He covered up Covid-related sickness and death in his own congregation - once again his pride overriding any call to reflect let alone repent.
The abuse cover-ups are particularly egregious and one is left bewildered when reading about them. There's a nastiness among some of these Church leaders and MacArthur's right-hand man - Phil Johnson must be included. The recalcitrance is somewhat staggering and it's also clear that MacArthur was known to lie and make up stories from time to time. For my part, it's all part of a hubris-driven package that in the end results in a kind of blindness and even judgment. It's certainly sobering to consider.
He receives a lot of unjustified criticism over his stands on say women's ordination and the like. On those points he was correct but again in the end, it just seems like something was wrong - there was something off about his ministry.
I'm afraid that while I might agree on the point of Lordship, his Calvinism was defective, and his Dispensationalism represented a distortion and massive misreading of Scripture. He rightly levied criticism at the Charismatic Movement, but this too was less than helpful as he wed their errors to their rejection of the doctrine of Eternal Security - which (like most contemporary Calvinists) he actually misunderstood. Perseverance is not the same as Once Saved Always Saved and for all his guarding against cheap grace - his own gospel presentation was (on these points) confused.
In the case of MacArthur, the struggle for the professing Christian is not a question of mortifying the deeds of the body (Romans 8.13) or the drive to continue in the faith grounded and settled and be not moved away from the gospel (Colossians 1.23), but instead a falling away ends up being a battle over whether or not one was genuinely converted in the first place. Aside from the usually misread passage in 1 John 2, the rest of the New Testament doesn't approach the question in that fashion. The approach typified by someone like MacArthur is driven by theological commitments not a careful read of Scripture. When combined with Baptistic understandings of the sacrament and conversion - let's just say this leads to a lot of confusion and even torment at times.
I once appreciated MacArthur and would listen to him on the radio but as the years went by and I grew in my faith and understanding, it was always as if something was off, and eventually it reached a point that I found myself getting irritated and turning him off.
In some respects I point to MacArthur and others like Sproul and Pink as touchstones in my own spiritual life. At one time I really benefitted from their teaching but this became more nuanced over time. Eventually I turned away from Sproul (with some disgust) and for the most part from MacArthur as well. As stated, I find it ironic that on the one point I think he was certainly correct - he receives criticism from within some sectors of contemporary Reformed circles.
For the record I still appreciate Arthur Pink but any endorsement must be qualified. He loved the Scriptures and there is much to glean from his teachings but the value of his commentaries is sometimes limited and when it comes to certain topics, prone to error.
John MacArthur's legacy is mixed at best. He loomed large over the late 20th and early 21st century Evangelical and Calvinist circles. Though he'd been around for decades, he really became a key figure in New Calvinism - and its celebrity ethos built around a 'brand' approach to theological identity, and one that made great use of technology. While some have been encouraged by this movement, my assessment is mostly negative. It has picked up some aspects of Calvinist thinking and yet is really just another variety of Evangelicalism - a movement I want nothing to do with. MacArthur carved out his own niche, inhabiting a realm between Calvinist-Reformed circles and that of Evangelicalism. And yet that 'niche' has turned into a substantial movement in its own right. It's not a denomination, but there are a large number of congregations that are more or less clones of his Grace Community Church in Los Angeles. I've attended more than a few and yet in every case I have found them wanting - and often confused.
For some he was the Spurgeon of our times, a faithful teacher and expositor of God's Word, a stalwart who stood the test of time. That's not my assessment but as I reflect on the thirty years I've been in the faith - I cannot help but think back about John MacArthur and the role he played in my formation. I'm thankful for that but it was also inevitable that (as I grew in the faith) I would turn away and look elsewhere. And I would encourage others to do the same.