Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook 104 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit 98 Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend (202 Shares)  

Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites   No comments
Devotionals

Andy Stanley Tries to Defend His Heresy

By       (Page 2 of 2 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page.     Permalink

 Add to My Group(s)

Rate It | View Ratings

828ministries.com H3'ed 10/2/16
Author 1
Message

"If we're going to reach the un-churched, under-churched, de-churched and post-churched with the gospel in a culture that's trending post-Christian, we must rethink our approach" Stanley claims.

No Andy. What you are arguing is that the Gospel is not sufficient. That this culture is somehow different that the generation from the 1960's or 1840's and they are not. Romans 1:16 assures us that only the Gospel has the power of God unto the salvation of man so changing it is not an option! The rethought approach Stanley engaged in is to try and convince millennials of the Gospel by carnal means of reason. What's the problem with that beloved? I am almost embarrassed to have to remind people but salvation is not a process of the mind but rather a process of the spirit. You cannot be convinced to be saved. The spirit must draw you through the correct preaching of the uncompromised Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Stanley believes many pastors still operate from the assumption that biblical authority is a persuasive tool to use in a Gospel presentation, a premise he openly questions. -- Church Leaders

I do not know any pastor who thinks this at all. There are no "tools" to persuade people other than the Gospel itself. This is what happens when you start relying on human wisdom, which Paul clearly teaches us empties the cross of its power. In his sermon Andy Stanley tried several persuasive arguments but the problem is they were all false. For instance, he opined that the Bible is not needed because there actually was no Bible for the first few hundred years of the faith. Is this a correct statement? Technically there were no bound Bibles as we have today but the church still used the Scriptures which would eventually become the Bible. In the New Testament, Peter even directly refers to the writings of Paul as Scripture! These points however seem completely lost in the muddle heresies of Andy Stanley.

"Appealing to post-Christian people on the basis of the authority of Scripture has essentially the same effect as a Muslim Imam appealing to you on the basis of the authority of the Quran. You may or may not already know what it says. But it doesn't matter. The Quran doesn't carry any weight with you. You don't view the Quran as authoritative. Close to half our population does not view the Bible as authoritative either." -- Andy Stanley

Once again, Stanley seems very confused. Perhaps this is what happens when you no longer consider yourself a shepherd. Let me explain the system God set up. In Acts Chapter Two, we see the model for the New Testament church and guess what? It is not meant for unbelievers! It is meant for the sheep. That is why the pastor is called a shepherd. He is responsible for the spiritual maturity of the sheep in God and for protecting them from wolves. How does one do this? Through the preaching of the true Gospel of course! Do we want the unsaved to come to our church? Of course! Where else will they hear the true Gospel, which we already pointed out is the only thing with the power of God unto their salvation. So you do not appeal to any unsaved populations with anything other than the Gospel. You do not need to deal with the authority of Scripture until later. Let the Spirit draw them. Let them repent of their sins. Advanced orthodoxy is learned later. Stanley keeps thinking it is his job to convince the unsaved to become saved but he does not have that power. Only God does. His job is to faithfully proclaim the Gospel.

"What is the faith of your children worth? Your grandchildren? Think about it. What is the faith of the next generation worth? I say, everything. I say it's worth any change necessary to ensure the version of faith the next generation leaves home with is the enduring version--the faith of our first-century fathers. The version that was harder than steel and tougher than nails. The version rooted in an event, not a book." - Andy Stanley

Wow. So after pretending he was not challenging the inerrancy of Scripture, he ends by again asserting that our faith should not be rooted in the Bible. Instead it should be rooted in an event that is only found in the Bible. The lunacy of this reverse logic is as staggering as it is heretical. The only enduring faith is one that has resulted from a preaching of the actual Gospel. Not trying to educationally teach why they should believe. When you use science and history to convince someone of something then science and history can also unconvince them. That is why we rely upon conversion through the Holy Spirit. The Bible says none comes to salvation unless the spirit draws them.

If you are truly concerned about millennials leaving the faith try going back to the real Gospel. That means preaching about sin and the need for repentance. That means preaching Calvary. That means deny yourself and picking up your cross. That means you do not sing New Kids on the Block or the Beatles during corporate worship. That means you do not cheapen Scripture which God has said He breathed out Himself. That means if you are playing the role of a pastor then you must shepherd the sheep the Lord has entrusted to you. Andy Stanley realized that many of the kids he was sending off to college were losing their faith and he immediately blamed God. He blamed the Gospel as not being sufficient. What he should have realized is true faith is not shaken by Earth Science 101. That means he sent off kids who had no faith. He should have looked long and hard in the mirror at that point and returned to the only thing that has the true power of God unto the salvation of man; the real Gospel of Jesus Christ. Until he does so, he remains a heretic. Sorry if that is not a measured enough reality for some.

Reverend Anthony Wade -- October 2, 2016

Next Page  1  |  2

 

Rate It | View Ratings

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon Share Author on Social Media   Go To Commenting

The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Joel Osteen Blasphemes "I Am" (53734 views)

Why I Have Left the Assemblies of God (34843 views)

Joyce Meyer Teaching the "Relationship over Religion" Heresy (18378 views)

Joyce Meyer -- A Prisoner of Heresy (16434 views)

Francis Chan Stands With Outright Heresy, Again (12999 views)

Bethel Teaches to Declare God is in a Good Mood and Other Insanities (12989 views)

Total Views: 149377

To View Comments or Join the Conversation: