Posted on 09/22/2016 10:45:55 AM PDT by fishtank
Pastor Andy Stanley says the Bible is too hard to defend
Evangelical pastor preaches that the Bible isn’t the foundation for the Christian faith
by Lita Cosner and Scott Gillis
Published: 22 September 2016 (GMT+10)
Andy Stanley has a church network of over 30,000 people in the Atlanta area, and his church was rated the fastest-growing in America in 2014 and 2015.1 Recently, he has been criticized by many evangelicals for saying that we need to take the focus off the Bible and put it on the Resurrection, because he claims that gives us a firmer foundation for our faith. As Stanley put it: “We believe Jesus rose from the dead not because the Bible says so. It is way better than that! Christianity does not hang by the thread of ‘The Bible told me so’.”2 And: “The original version [of Christianity], the pre-Bible version, was defensible, it was endurable, it was persecutable, it was fearless, it was compassionate, and it was compelling,” but he claims “it is next to impossible to defend the entire Bible”.2
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
.
Don’t bother going to “Rethinking Hell,” it is the typical rant from one who picks one particular verse to completely misunderstand and twist into a safety valve for those that know they are not on Yehova’s plan, but think the alternative may be OK.
They reject the very literal words of the Revelation, and declare them to be metaphor and beyond the understanding of the very people to whom it was written. (IOW, our Elohim must really be a trickster with a twisted sense of humor)
They cannot even see that the seven lampstands are the Menorah, and that we are to be the Chanukites of end days.
Telling someone that “there is ‘scripture’ to support their belief” but being unwilling to post the scripture is somewhat reminescent of Hillary Clinton at Monday’s ‘debate.’
.
Actually, they have a LOT of scripture to back it up. That is what i recerred to in my post.
No offense, but I think you may be in over your head on this.
.If there were any scripture, it would have been posted.
There simply is not so much as one verse, that is why you don’t “re-invent the wheel.”
This mush is well established in your posting history.
.
Matt 24:39-41 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.It appears that there will be a separation when Christ returns. Like in the days of Noah, some will be taken away to judgment and those left behind will enter the millennial kingdom without dying. This is the preservation of the flesh Matthew 24:22. I think Schofield got it right, this is not the rapture, this is the second coming when Christ will rule with rod of iron.
I separate it into two ~3.5 year periods. The first is the tribulation. This is followed by the rapture in chapter 7 of revelation, followed by the wrath of God.
But it’s just my opinion. I used to “know”. I’ve been humbled on this one.
That’s not good.
Thank God for Franklin Graham and sister Anne...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.