Andy Stanley says Ten Commandments don't apply to Christians

Andy Stanley preaches to an estimated 33,000 people every Sunday at North Point Ministries' five metro-Atlanta campuses. | Photo courtesy of North Point Ministries

Christians should quit erecting Ten Commandments displays and should instead consider making monuments dedicated to the Sermon on the Mount, popular pastor Andy Stanley said.

In a column published by Relevant Magazine, the North Point Community Church pastor argued that the Ten Commandments are “the old covenant” and no longer apply to believers.

"[I]f we’re going to create a monument to stand as a testament to our faith, shouldn’t it at least be a monument of something that actually applies to us?" he posed.

“Participants in the new covenant (that’s Christians) are not required to obey any of the commandments found in the first part of their Bibles,” wrote Stanley. “Participants in the new covenant are expected to obey the single command Jesus issued as part of his new covenant: as I have loved you, so you must love one another.”

This new commandment is "a replacement for everything in the existing list. Including the big ten," he maintained. "Just as his new covenant replaced the old covenant, Jesus’ new commandment replaced all the old commandments."

Stanley went on to say that he believed so much of the evils committed by churches over history were connected to them trying to mix aspects of the old covenant with Christianity and that although “Jesus was foreshadowed in the old covenant, he did not come to extend it.”

“Dear Christian reader: Why? Why? Why would we even be tempted to reach back beyond the cross to borrow from a covenant that was temporary and inferior to the covenant established for us at Calvary?” Stanley continued.

“The author of Hebrews says it best. Jesus was the ‘guarantor of a better covenant’ (Hebrews 7:22). Later he writes, ‘the new covenant is established on better promises.’ Besides, you weren’t included in the old covenant to begin with! So why are we fighting to build monuments to it?”

In the book, Stanley spoke about "old covenant leftovers," stating that he believed Christians had "an uncomfortable history and habit of selectively rebranding aspects of God's covenant with Israel and smuggling them into the ekklesia of Jesus."

Stanley wrote that while the covenant God made with ancient Israel was "divinely ordained," it was also "temporary," adding, "Careless mixing and matching of old and new covenant values and imperatives make the current version of our faith unnecessarily resistible."

Last year, Stanley garnered controversy when he argued in an April sermon that Christians should “unhitch” themselves from the Old Testament.

To justify this, Stanley cited Acts 15, which described how early church leaders decided that Gentile converts did not need to strictly observe Jewish law to become Christians.

"[First century] Church leaders unhitched the church from the worldview, value system, and regulations of the Jewish scriptures," preached Stanley. "Peter, James, Paul elected to unhitch the Christian faith from their Jewish scriptures, and my friends, we must as well.”

He argued that what launched Christianity was the resurrection of Jesus, not the Jewish scriptures.

Many, including Messianic Jewish author and radio personality Michael Brown, have denounced Stanley's “unhitch” comments.

"A pastor as influential as Andy Stanley needs to distance himself from such heresies, making a public, clear, and unequivocal correction that undoes the confusion he has caused. (He knows that I write this [as] a friend, out to help, not to hurt.)," wrote Brown in a column last year.

"He can preach against legalism and against Judaizing, exalting the grace of God and celebrating the newness of the New Covenant, without undermining the very foundations on which that New Covenant is established."

Ray Ortlund, senior pastor of Immanuel Church in Nashville, Tennessee, and the president of Renewal Ministries, also denounced Stanley’s views in a speech at the Gospel Coalition's West Coast Conference last October.

Preaching from 2 Timothy 1:3-8, Ortlund noted that when the Apostle Paul was writing to Timothy, he stressed his religious heritage through Judaism.

"Paul looks back into his own deepest roots. He goes back to David, to Moses, to Abraham. He reveres the faith that came down to him even filtered through Jewish tradition," said Ortlund.

"Unlike some preachers today, Paul did not 'unhitch' the Christian faith from the Old Testament … And for him personally, Christian conversion did not take his Jewishness away. It made Jesus the Lord over his Jewishness and over his conscience, both of which, he continues to honor."

For his part, Stanley explained that critics needed to understand the context, especially since his remarks were more for an audience that is turned off by biblical arguments.

"I told my kids growing up, if anyone ever asks you 'do you believe Adam and Eve are real people?' here is how you are to answer: do not say 'yes because the Bible says Adam and Eve were real people,'" commented Stanley in an interview with Michael Brown last July.

"You say this: 'I believe Adam and Eve were historical characters because Jesus did. And when somebody predicts their own death and resurrection and pulls it off, I go with whatever they say.'"

“The Ten Commandments are separate from the Mosaic law.”

Sorry to see you go, Bob. When you say this, please consider that there was only one covenant given at Sinai. in Galatians 4.24, Paul spoke of the allegory of Hagar and Sarah:

“Which things contain an allegory: for these women are two covenants; ONE from mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage, which is Hagar.

Paul obviously understood that only one covenant was given at Mt. Sinai. Similarly, in Heb. 9.1-4, the author used exclusive language to speak about the single covenant made at Mt. Sinai:

“Now even THE FIRST COVENANT had ordinances and the ark of THE COVENANT and the tables of THE COVENANT.”

What was on the tables of covenant, Bob? The very ten commandments you say were separate from the Mosaic Law!

Other Bible passages declare that only one covenant was given at Mt. Sinai, but notice here the elements of that one covenant, which included:

The TABLES of the COVENANT Dt. 9.9
The BOOK of the COVENANT Ex. 24.7
The ARK of the COVENANT Dt. 31.26
The BLOOD of the COVENANT Ex. 24.8
The MEDIATOR of the COVENANT Gal. 3.19

From an examination of scriptures like this, we can see that only one covenant was made with Israel at Mt. Sinai. That one covenant included the ten commandments and, hence, the commandment to keep the sabbath.

Jer 31:31 "Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah—
Jer 31:32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the LORD.
Jer 31:33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

The new covenant is the old covenant internalized. It's God's laws NOW written in our minds and our hearts. These are summed up by the ten commandments which are summed up by "love God and neighbor".

By the way this means the Sabbath commandment is STILL in force IF the other 9 are...

“The new covenant is the old covenant internalized.” It’s God’s laws NOW written in our minds and our hearts.”

So you’re saying all the Old Covenant is binding upon Christians, not just the ten commandments.

By the way, this means that not just the ten commandments are to be internalized, but all the Old Covenant: food laws, stoning sabbath breakers, Levitical priesthood, all of it. Send me a picture of your stoning a sabbath-breaker and I’ll know you believe this argument enough to obey it.

To that question, I have only my own opinion which is no, there is not a Christian sabbath. The sabbath was created in the Covenant God had with the Israelites. Of that, I don't think there's any question.

That said, I don't think there's anything wrong with following the example set through creation which was God working six days to create the heaven's and the earth and resting on the seventh day.

Again, my own opinion.

I attended FBC Atlanta with Charles Stanley for the four years I was in college at GaTech (it was within walking distance of the campus.) The Charles Stanley style of church is very different from the Andy Stanley style. Charles spoke to “the body” of believers so that as a group we would be prepared to go out into the world and spread the love and salvation of Christ. Andy, however, not only invites and welcomes non-believers and those who are far from God into his church, but they are the target audience of his sermons! Consequently, Andy is approaching these issues from a different perspective. His terminology must be seeker-sensitive so his message can be digested and received by unchurched people. Different styles are awkward and uncomfortable - we are creatures of habit - but different isn’t necessarily wrong or bad. Andy is correct that Jesus calls his followers to a higher standard than that established in the 10 commandments. He is just following up that expectation with the realization that we lose focus on the freedom and life of the New Covenant when we build monuments to the pillars of the Old Covenant. The Old Testament is supremely important as it is the word of God - but, it must be considered in context - we have a risen Savior; we are no longer looking forward to his initial arrival here on Earth.

“I don’t think there’s anything wrong with following the example set through creation which was God working six days to create the heaven’s and the earth and resting on the seventh day.”

I think you’re absolutely right, USC. That’s exactly what Paul said in Rom. 14.5: “One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let each man be fully assured in his own mind.”

Of course, those who think the sabbath is binding on Christians can’t permit such. “Esteeming every day alike” certainly wasn’t permitted under the Old Covenant.

Thanks for your contribution!

I see you agree with me regarding Matthew. Here Jesus is speaking as a Jew to a Jew. Someone might say that what he says doesn’t necessarily apply to Gentile believers. (The entire gospel of Matthew could be said to be for Jewish believers.)

Your point about the verses I quoted from Romans and the sabbath, and the several verses you cite, is well taken. Jesus himself had a relaxed approach to the sabbath, while still observing it. Yes, we Gentile Christians are not required to observe the sabbath. But, it is good that we have a day of rest, a day of community worship and a rhythm to the week. I am happy to enjoy that day on Sunday. The other meanings of the sabbath - as a limit on punishment (except for capital offenses) and as a year to be debt-free - are also good for us to consider.

Regarding remembering that we were slaves in the land of Egypt is treated as the preamble to the Ten Commandments by Christians, and as the first of the ten by Jews. God does not demand that we obey his commandments because he created us or because otherwise he will punish us. He demands we obey his commandments because he has freed us.

John 14:6 New International Version (NIV)

6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

Does it say through the 10 Commandments? Answer: No

So Andy is absolutely correct as initially perplexing as this is to read.

This is even demonstrated on the cross. Jesus told a thief on the cross that he would be in Heaven with Him. This was after Jesus asked asked the thief if he believed that Jesus was the Son of God,

Our sins from the original covenant in the Old Testament are paid through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. All we have to do is have faith that Jesus Christ is our Lord, Savior and King. He is the way, the truth and the Light. No one can go to God except THROUGH Jesus Christ.

Remember too that God, Jesus and the Holly Spirit is the Trinity. It is all one. So YES it is a new covenant. Andy is correct.

Does this mean I disregard the 10 Commandments. Answer : No

From what little I’ve read about him, Stanley sounds like he loves to equivocate and push the envelope. In the four Gospels, the old testament is quoted 86 times, including Jesus referencing the Commandments. In the rest of the New Testament, it is quoted 179 times.
Paul spoke six of the Commandments, then said if you love your neighbor as yourself, you will fulfill these and all the Commandments. There is a teaching in some denominations, that the Old Testament is not relevant, that everything we need for life and Godliness is in the New Testament. But the disciples, let alone the LORD, would not use The Old Testament for instruction, if it were not valid. Jesus, of course, fulfilled “the Law and the Prophets, but did not do away with them, but there are Old Testament prophecies related to the end times, which have not yet been fulfilled. Jesus received the punishment that the Old Testament required of everyone, for breaking laws that were not possible, in our human frailty, to keep. He IS the Atonement. Justice was done. He is both our justice, and our mercy. If we avail ourselves of his sacrifice, and accept him as LORD. If we do not, then we are under the curse of the law, and will receive just punishment when we die.

I understand your arguments, but do you think Jesus changed his message so as not to offend unbelievers? He offended nearly everybody. On purpose. He spoke the truth to them. He also showed great love and mercy by his miracles. He also said I am come to save the lost sheep of Israel. The Jews. But then he healed the Canaanite woman’s daughter, because of her faith. (The disciples still didn’t get it, though. Not til Peter’s vision of the unclean food. But that’s an whole other topic)

I don’t read it that way. At worst (from a logical perspective), the Pharisees ***just*** miss the cut, and you have to be more righteous than them to make it. But, more likely, what he meant was that if you’re not at least as righteous as them, you have no chance...meaning that they probably DID have a chance (else, why would he have talked of the “righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees?”

Besides, he grouped scribes and Pharisees. I’ve never seen or heard any complaints about the scribes being somehow unrighteous, etc. As a simple matter of FACT (and I KNOW because my brother is a scribe), scribes have to know and properly practice over 2,000 different rules in the course of their work. They are, by definition, righteous because they are obeying the word of God (which, of course, says nothing about them outside of their work...but again, no one ever complained about the scribes). So how, exactly, can you get from that verse in Matthew that the Pharisees were NOT righteous?

My wife and I will sign our Last Will and Testament in a few weeks. Previously, we had two wills, the earliest being 1989. At the moment we sign those wills, our wills of 1989 will have no effect whatsoever on the distribution of our estate. A judge will spend NO time considering that will, except for one reason: Intent.

If we had expressed an intent in the earlier will and then a rather different intent in the current will, a heir would challenge the last will on that matter and the court would be interested and resolving that issue.

So, when Christ died, a New Testament became active. The old Testament became null and void.

The Jews made all kinds of trouble for Paul about observing the Old Testament and Paul had a terrible time convincing the Jews/Jewish Christians that new (Gentile) Christians did not have to follow the laws of worship in the Old Testament.

So, the issue of observing the Sabbath Day is moot. From the earliest, Christians observed the first day of the week.

God’s purpose for the Old Testament was to little-by-little bring the people to be ready for Jesus Christ. In the KJV, the OT is referred as a “schoolmaster”, teaching little-by-little as time went by.

Having been in Egypt for 400 years, it is understandable that Israel was susceptible to idol worship, since idols were all over Egypt. Even Solomon was subverted by idols. But, on returning from Babylon/Persia to rebuild the temple, we hear no more about idols. Israel was closer to being ready for Christ and His New Testament.

Hello.

Read the Sermon on the Mount.

Jesus sets the bar even higher than the Ten Commandments.

Nobody is saying that Christians can sin as they please, which is the lamest argument I’ve ever heard from those offended by the argument that keeping the Ten Commandments is not required of Christians.

So, in your study of the Old Testament scriptures, you understand that the Apostle Paul has another Jesus and another gospel than what Christianity teaches?

The Old Testament proves it. That’s not denigrating ‘that part of the bible’.
It’s testing and proving all things with the scriptures Paul studied.. The Old Testament.
And it can be argued that Judiasm today and Islam actually follow what Christianity teaches as opposed to what Paul studied and taught..

That describes the last ‘about 2,000’ years of time.

That may be why demons entered ‘about 2,000’ swine.
A prophetic picture of the last about 2,000 years after the Light left.
Religion happened..

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.