Tags
The Double Standard of Chris Rosebrough
Chris Rosebrough of Pirate Christian Radio has released a program attempting to show how Rick Warren holds common ground with the Pharisees. Rosebrough shows time and time again how Warren irrationally twist God’s Word to make his teaching seem biblical.
That’s a good thing. Exposing this kind of garbage is beneficial to the Church.
And, I’ll be the first to tell you that I appreciate Chris Rosebrough’s efforts to date. He is exposing falsehood left and right, informing the Church of many heresies and other errors of doctrinal importance.
However…..
Chris is very selective when it comes to who he examines. Easy targets mostly, like Rick Warren.
The concern here is where does Chris stand when error and heresy comes from someone within the – and I use this term loosely – reformed camp?
When it comes to highly respected, much admired “reformed” Christian leaders, Chris doesn’t stand at all for truth and defending the faith. Actually, he’s quite silent. Why?
Because Chris Rosebrough has one standard for easy targets and notoriety of his own ministry, and less heart and courage for truly defending the faith once delivered to the saints – before God – especially when it comes to men like John MacArthur and others who have so deceived the Church.
5 Pt. Salt 
What is wrong with teh teaching of John MacArthur? I genuinely would like to know.
See here: http://5ptsalt.com/false-teachings/
Sadly, other, even more influential & Reformed (Calvinistic) church leaders are prone to confusion over Warren: http://www.trinityfoundation.org/horror_show.php?id=51
One reason Chris is less than consistent in standing when error and heresy comes from someone within the loosely “reformed camp,” is b/c he is VERY “loosely reformed,” being a Lutheran!
Ouch! 🙂
Pingback: End Times Prophecy Headlines: May 28, 2014 | End Times Prophecy Report
Rosebrough has blind spots that have nothing to do with Reformed circles. His softball interview/PR piece of Jonathan Cahn was one long defense of the gnostic teachings contained in the Harbinger. Rosebrough could have cleared the air and forced Cahn to answer a few tough questions.
It was not to be.
Rosebrough provided cover for Cahn’s book and was so groveling in his treatment, I refused to listen to him after that. It was truly as eye-opening as it was disgusting.
When the subject matter moves off of Joel Osteen, the pope, Word-Faith or any other low-hanging fruit, Rosebrough is quite simply lost for words.
Good piece,btw.
Amen, JJ ’13, amen. I just saw Chris R’s funny “translation” of Ken Copeland’s babble upon viewing Fran1’s video. But ‘low-hanging fruit” is an apt description of Rosebrough’s soft targets.
I am unfamiliar with Cahn – is he Lutheran? Could that be a motive?
Cahn is a Messianic Jew reportedly.
His best seller, The Harbinger, was a very seductive package of gnosticism sold to the Christian buying public as a work of fiction with prophetic truth for the USA in it.
Rosebrough had the chance to ask some probing questions about the many, many unbiblical portions of the book. But instead, he served up a PR piece for both Cahn and the book.
Rosebrough was slobbering so much in the interview, it’s a wonder the microphone didn’t short out.
Thanks, Jeremiah. Shocking, saddening, & sickening that Chris did that.
And not a little disappointing.
So, he was to be a jerk during the interview? Why don’t you listen to his responses to the interview and the book as well. http://www.fightingforthefaith.com/.services/blog/6a00e54eea6129883300e54efeb5c98834/search?filter.q=cahn
There’s a great deal of real estate between fawning obsequiousness and “being a jerk.”
Revealing that you would equate asking honest, tough questions with “being a jerk.” It reveals that little honest, tough questioning can be expected when the subject is outside of Rosebrough’s basket of favorite low-hanging fruit.
I listen to Chris Rosebrough on a fairly consistent basis. The reason I’ve heard Chris say that he doesn’t go after the Calvinists is because they preach Christ and Him crucified for our sins and considers them alies.
And Calvinists don’t go after Lutherans as long as they preach Christ and him crucified. Where we differ is on whose sins are “our’s” – mankind’s or the elect only? Then we go after the Lutherans. 🙂
Why do you have to pit one against the other? Have you not read 1 John 2:2?
Dear “Reformissional,”
Of course it has to be one or the other. It’s impossible that Jesus died for all mankind and that he died only for the elect, using the phrase “died for” unequivocally. Pronoun understanding is hugely important and all false teachers stumble over 1 Cor. 15:3f, Rom. 5:1-11, and Isaiah 53:4-6. “Us,” “we,” & “our” refer not to all mankind, but to God’s elect, for whom Christ effectually & savingly died.
“He died for all the world” for the purpose of saving only his elect, believers (John 3:15f). His propitiation is effectual only for those predestined as vessels o’ glory. He specifically prays not for the world the night before his crucifixion (John 17:9).
He is the propitiation for all the world, in the same sense that he is the Saviour of all mankind (1 Tim. 4:10) – “‘SPECIALLY of them that believe”! (And John is probably saying that Christ is not Saviour of only the Jews.)
Just as he is the only Mediator (2:5) and the only name that saves (Acts 4:12). But he does not propitiate for all of mankind’s sins, else, all mankind would be saved.
So, John the Apostle lied when he said, “He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.”?
The phrase the whole world relates not to every creature God has made, for then the fallen angels also would share in Christ’s redemption. The word whole describes the world in its totality, not necessarily in its individuality.
Ref, Were the propitiation of Christ for all the sins of all mankind, then either all men would be saved (universalism, which I hope you deny), or the propitiation would be insufficient of itself to save men, and something more would have to be added: works-righteousness (which I trust you confessionally deny?).
The free-will proponent adds the work of the penitent’s believing to the work of Christ, blaspheming the Saviour’s work. But if faith is the work of God alone, then the propitiation is only for believers.
One cannot have it both ways: Either Christ died to propitiate for the sins of all mankind or he died to propitiate (pay for) the sins of his elect. Read John 10 a few times. John’s gospel well give us the doctrines of grace!
So, as a Calvinist, would you say that there is really no point for world missions?
sure you can. it is a paradox because I see both in the Scriptures. I am not a universalist. I do believe nobody can come to the Son unless the Father draws them (John 6) through the preaching of the Gospel (Romans 10). I do believe that God saves monergisitcly through Jesus Christ alone by grace alone through faith alone to the glory of God alone. However, I was raised a Lutheran and i have dear brothers and sisters in Christ that are Lutheran. However, I have been taken classes at Calvary Chapel Bible College and I do know the importance of reading things in context.
First of all, how do the topics being discussed here pertain to Chris Rosebrough and his avoidance of men such as MacArthur? Please stay on topic, thanks. Secondly, what you describe is not a paradox, but a contradiction which does not exist. eos.
this is about the gospel, which was the original point I made. Both Calvinists and Lutherans preach the gospel of Christ and Him crucified for our sins. So, i really don’t understand why you would want to pick on a brother in Christ because he doesn’t go after a certain teacher who has an errant belief on a secondary issue (yep, i’ve looked at the archive) that has NOTHING pertaining to matters of eternity. This is why Rosebrough does not go after MacArthur. Secondly, It is totally a paradox. You have scriptures that say that It is God who calls, elects, and saves. And there are scriptures that says that whoever exercises faith in Christ will be saved. It is two sides of the same coin! It makes no sense to harp on God’s sovereignty at the exclusion of man’s responsibility for the light that which he/she is shown.
Be careful. Salvation is not a secondary issue, and to say there is such a thing as a biblical secondary issue is to say that there are some things God has communicated to us that are not important. I wouldn’t go there.
Ref,
Calvinists believe in world missions and your question is either just 1. ignorant or 2. stupid or 3. knowingly baiting.
We do missions 1. Because Christ commanded us to (Mt. 28:18ff) and 2. because it’s God’s means (Rom. 10) to his appointed end, the salvation of some (1 Cor. 9:22).
Being a recovering Calvary Chapelitic, I can say its strength is the Bible; it’s serious deficiency is its slavish dependence on charismatics, Smith, Finney & other Arminians. Its abhorrence with sovereign grace is sadly telling. Beware.
As a fan of Chris’ show I certainly have my own critiques of him and have wondered myself why he hasn’t taken MaCarthur to task for some of his false-teaching. However, I believe you are being very presumptuous. I would seriously question your assertion that he has been totally silent when it comes to the Reformed camp. In fact I have heard him take John Piper to task for having Rick Warren speak at his conference. And if you consider Mark Driscoll to be in the Refromed camp (which Driscoll himself definitely considers himself to be) then know that Chris has been extremely critical of Mark Driscoll.
I do believe that he has acknowledged that he has some concerns about some of McCarthur’s teaching but I confess I would like to see Chris challenge McCarthur. That said, I think you are way off in your insinuation that he is merely going after low hanging fruit. He goes after people like Warren, OSteen, TD Jakes etc. not just because they are easy targets but because they are the voices people are listening to. And I am sure he is aware that devotees of Osteen, Warren etc are likely not listening to his show. But people who listen to his show more than likely know people who do read their books, listen to their podcasts etc. My guess is that he sees his ministry as equipping people for when they encounter people who believe the false-teachers.
Lutherans are confused at best.
how do you know?
Ha ha! Touché. We know by sola scripture, of course. The Lutherans stayed too close to Rome and thus strayed from the safe moorings to which they’d returned.
(My pic is honoring the German Reformer on his better days. Chris R. is trapped in a sadly self-refuting, contradictory system.)
can you know everything that there is to know about everything?
Please see article, “How Does Man Know God?” by Gordon Clark.
Mr Rosebrough and his Lutheran friends would do well to read more of Luther (on his more biblical days) – “Luther on Free Will” by Godwell Chan is good reading.
We Lutherans read more Luther than people on Luther.
(y)
Too much Luther and not enough Scripture is an imbalance, too!
It might help if people get up to speed on where Joel is coming from. Whether one agrees with him 100% or not, the articles he’s penned below need to be read and assessed.
Joel, might I suggest that you add the tag “John MacArthur” to the list above?
Premillennial Dispensationalism
1. How John MacArthur Denies the Grounds of Salvation
2. John MacArthur is Robbing the Church
3. God’s Word or John MacArthur’s?
4. John MacArthur’s Other Gospel
5. What Will the Church Do with Such A Man?
6. Judgment & The Millennial Error
7. Why Harold Camping & Not John MacArthur?
8. Reformed Theology Opposes John MacArthur
9. Jesus Christ Is Israel
10. The Honor of Believers
11. John MacArthur: “Jesus Christ does not presently exercise His full divine will over the earth.”
12. 5 Reasons No One Will Rebuke John MacArthur
13. John MacArthur – Pushing Darby
ODM’s pose a risk, and a high one at that, of falling into the very trap they seek to expose. Rosebrough’s “double standard” is something I’ve experienced personally in both public and private conversations with him. His own brand of exegesis at times leaves a lot to be desired. No doubt, just about anyone out there can find a following, and Chris’ ego is certainly something that draws that type of crowd. I personally don’t see any benefit to the body of Christ with his or many other ODM’s. Chris is a captive to his own ego, pride and his self-promotion. A.W. Tozer said it like this, “its just the same business on the other side of the street..” I, personally, wouldn’t cross the street to hear Rosebrough preach…
I’ve listened and read stuff by Chris on and off for a few years, donated to him, blah blah. I agree he does a great duty to exposing false teaching, prophets of profit and challenging commonly misunderstood Scripture. And I’ll continue reading/listening to him. There’s much more good I could say.
But. I have some opinions. He cannot be wrong, or accept other Scriptural interpretations that may be contrary to his. He is completely a cessationist and won’t budge. Maybe that’s a Lutheran thing. It seems he is against anything Pentecostal on the same basis. I’m not talking about “extreme” Pentecostalism, just your everyday Christian who believes in healing and some prophecy.
Also seems a bit like a current affairs program where he takes one small bad thing someone has said and blows it out of proportion. I also recall him saying a big deep laugh TD Jakes did was “the voice of Satan himself”. That’s a bit harsh.
So I think Chris does a great service and generally have no great problems with him. But recently his “fighting” for the faith appears to have become simply “fighting”. As much discernment he helps people use, don’t be surprised if there’s discernment of his discernment soon.