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 ...
Deuteronomy is instructions to a theorcratic nation and not germane to what I posted. I’m part of the new covenant which completed the first one.
BTW, there are two things they mention all the time in all the churches that I have attended that I do not believe are new testament concepts:
1. Tithing - this was the way “taxes” were paid in their theocracy in the old testament.
2. Alter - this is where they sacrificed to the lord. The new testament equivalent of the alter is the cross.
He didn’t say that, did He?
If I said, in 1935, that all cars had manual transmissions, was I talking about cars made today?
And the new testament is a collection of books. The old testament is scripture. The new testament includes a bunch of letters, a vision (revelation), a documentary account of the apostles up to a certain point and the life and times and teaching of Christ (the gospels).
It is extremely valuable teaching and very important, but it holds a lot of information that was specific to the culture (e.g. women talking in church) and other such stuff - at one point Paul even says, “this is me talking, not God”.
That last part is important because the clear implication is that the rest of the time it IS God talking. And I believe that.
So I see the bible as VERY important in expanding my knowledge of God and improving my relationship with Him and my fellow man (the only two things that really matter in the end), but I see it as a collection of what I mentioned above. I don’t worship it. If I had to choose between prayer and the bible, I’d choose prayer.
The difference here is that He is transcendent. You aren’t.
.
Deuteronomy is instructions to all of Yeshua’s assembly.
(as is all of Torah)
The “new covenant” is a twisted name for the renewed covenant spoken of by Jeremiah, renewed in Yeshua’s sinless blood. There is no other covenant. (if you think there is, show it to us in the scriptures)
All covenants are with Yehova and his assembly, Yisrael (the only people that will find eternal life).
Churchianity is the broad path that leads to destruction.
If it isn’t in the scriptures, it is not for Yisrael.
.
.
>> “And the new testament is a collection of books.” <<
No, the “New Testament” is the “Old Testament,” Renewed in Yeshua’s sinless blood.
A testament is a contract between two or more parties.
If you are not a part of the covenant that Yeshua confirms with his ancient assembly Yisrael on the day of Trumpets, you will not have a place in the New Jerusalem.
.
.
>> “If I had to choose between prayer and the bible, I’d choose prayer.” <<
If you didn’t have the scriptures that Yeshua and his apostles had when they ministered in the synagogues how would you know whom to pray to, and in whose name that prayer was authorized.
Yeshua said “it is written” as often as he said “go and sin no more.”
You could not know what sin even is without Torah, our “instruction in righteousness.”
.
The difference here is that He is transcendent. You aren’t.
That is an interesting perspective with which I disagree.
There is a phrase repeated in Romans: First for the Jew, then for the gentile.
The collection of books included in what is commonly called the “New Testament” includes four Gospels, a vision, a documentary on the acts of the apostles, and several letters.
I can’t answer hypothetical, but I will say that word of mouth can be highly effective, if empowered through the holy spirit.
Also, the more I read and listen to scripture, the more I realize that a LOT of what Christians believe is not the actual word of God, but someone elses interpretation of it. And I disagree with a lot of those interpretations now.
The biggest is that i used to be a believer in ECT (Eternal Conscious Torment) of people who “die in their sins”. I’m now a strong proponent if CI (conditional immortality), and that only the saved, as clearly taught in the Bible, receive eternal life.
A collection of writings is just an arbitrary choice. It is in no way a “testament” of anything.
If you think there is a testament in there, give a reference to where.
This is the “New Testament:”
Jeremiah 31:
[31] Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
[32] Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
[33] But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
[34] And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD; for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Note that this new testament is with the House of Israel, and The House of Judah, not with any imaginary "church." .
I’m now a strong proponent if CI (conditional immortality), and that only the saved, as clearly taught in the Bible, receive eternal life.
So what do you do with verses like this? There are others for you to look up.
Mat 25:46 “And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous will go into eternal life.”
2Th_1:9 They will be punished with eternal destruction, forever separated from the Lord and from His glorious power.
A further thought. What are you saved from?
Another comment is that using the following tells me you ARE NOT doing your own thinking:
The biggest is that i used to be a believer in ECT (Eternal Conscious Torment) of people who “die in their sins”. I’m now a strong proponent if CI (conditional immortality),
.
You need to study the scriptures to discover who the “gentiles” really are.
They are the people to whom Yeshua was “sent.” (Matthew 15:24)
.
You expirienced them. You didn’t cause them.
Gal 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.I believe that the word "scripture" is always a reference to Christ. "Search the scriptures for in them ye think ye have eternal life and they are they which testify of me." (John 5:39) That could explain how the scripture preached to Abraham before the Old Testament was written.
John 19:36 For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.Indeed, Scripture cannot be broken.
Sounds like Pastor Andy is in the wrong profession.
I think I know more than you think I know. I think where you and I differ is on our interpretation of scripture.
Your posts remind me of this sort of stuff:
https://www.bing.com/search?q=ten+lost+tribes+of+israel
It may be. I do comment to people in my church that though the church claims there are two kinds of people, the lost and the saved, I think there are three: The lost sheep, the found sheep and the goats. I see it as a waste to share the gospel with goats. However, I don’t know who the goats are.
Just thought I’d mention that I have no contention with you regarding Jeremiah. However, it does not mention his relationship with those outside the house of Israel. Also, Paul mentions breaking off new branches and grafting in new branches not from the original tree. This sounds like what Jesus said in the few verses AFTER 15:24.
So what do you do with verses like this? There are others for you to look up.
Mat 25:46 “And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous will go into eternal life.”
2Th_1:9 They will be punished with eternal destruction, forever separated from the Lord and from His glorious power.
I’m a member of this site: Rethinkinghell.com.
Go to http://rethinkinghell.com/explore/
Then go to the Scripture tab and, under that, the traditionalism tab. The refutations of each and everyu “ECT” supporting scripture are there.
Also, you said, “A further thought. What are you saved from?”
This is a big one for me. What you are saved from is what we got and Adam was warned about in the garden: Death. And not death of the body. That is a “tent” we occupy. It is death of the “you”.
Also, you said, “Another comment is that using the following tells me you ARE NOT doing your own thinking:”
Actually, the exact opposite was true. When I believed in ECT I was simply believing what others told me. When I started actaully studying the concept and doing my own thinking, THAT is when I turned from the barbaric ECT teaching. And it is utterly barbaric, especially when considering Romans 9.
It also seriously damages the Christian message. CI makes it thus: Because of sin, you are destined to live and die, and then cease to exist, but the Gospel offers more. It claims you can, through the blood of Christ through His death and resurrection, receive eternal life in a glorified body.
I choose the latter.
The ECT teaching actually causes people to do one of two things: 1. Come to Jesus out of abject terror of God. 2. Throw out the Gospel as woefully stupid because what kind of loving god sends people who, without proof, refuse to believe he is “the” god/creator, to an unimaginable and eternal torment?
Let me tell you that when I spar with “anti-christians” on this subject, it is IMPERATIVE to them that the bible teaces ECT. And if they can’t counter my (or any CI) arguments, it takes all the wind out of their sails.
The message is clear. Eternal life / immortality is offered to only one type of person. The rest perish, die, etc.
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.