Pastor Andy Stanley says the Bible is too hard to defend

Creation Ministries International ^ | 9-22-16 | Lita Cosner and Scott Gillis

[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

[Seven_0]

First, I think “scripture” is a man-made word and, therefore, flawed

I admit that scripture is difficult to defend, but the best tool we have to defend it is scripture. You say it is man-made. I say look at some details and decide. Maybe we can find some common ground for dialog. I realize that it is rare to move someone from his position.

Note the New Testament has 8 authors and 27 books. Both are perfect cubes. A bit of trivia, but it is not likely that this is man-made and coincidence is not really possible when God is involved. You have to start somewhere. The details do not carry much weight but they are cumulative in nature so start keeping score. Every detail you find that is not likely attributable to man lowers the probability that your assertion is correct. Consider the following verses.

Prov 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.

Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

1 Cor 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

These verses give guidance on some things we come across. If we find something that is concealed in scripture, it is probably God who put it there. I know of no evidence that men ever did this. Next, it looks like God uses the things he made to help us understand the things we cannot see. Look at a fingerprint. Designed so that we leave evidence of our presence on everything we touch. If God has written the Bible, we should expect to find his fingerprints on every page.

The last verse is a rule in scripture that is hardly noticed but is very common. Beginning with Cain and Able, the natural man is always first. I would challenge you to find a first-born son in Christ's genealogy. Thus the Old Testament gives the history of the natural man, Adam, and the New Testament gives us the spiritual man Christ.

It turns out that the New Testament divides into a pentateuch with the same structure and the Pentateuch of Moses. Genesis gives the line of Adam and ends in a coffin in Egypt. The Gospels give the line of Christ and end in the ascension. Exodus shows the natural man leaving Egypt and Acts shows the spiritual man leaving that city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt where also our Lord was crucified (Rev 11:8). Leviticus takes us into the Earthly tabernacle while Paul's letters take us into the heavenly temple. Numbers is into the desert and the general epistles take us before men. Finally Deuteronomy brings the natural man to the threshold of the Earthly inheritance and Revelation brings the spiritual man the threshold of the heavenly inheritance.

This is probably not something men thought to do. If that is not enough, there are three more pentateuchs in the Old Testamant, the Covenant History, the Prophets, and Experience books Job thru Song of Solomon. This makes the Bible another Pentateuch. Add to that the Psalms, which is also called the Pentateuch of David, divides into five books and the Epistles of Paul give us two more. All have the same structure.

God told us to prove all things, hold fast that which is good. There is no proof for those who do not search the Scripture. It is the honor of kings to search out a matter.

[Mr. Douglas]

Show us where the Bible describes a “new covenant.”

Post the text.

---

No need to re-invent the wheel...
https://www.openbible.info/topics/new_covenant

[Mr. Douglas]

Show us where the Bible describes a “new covenant.”

Post the text.

---

No need to re-invent the wheel...
https://www.openbible.info/topics/new_covenant

[Mr. Douglas]

It is Kehilla in Hebrew, and was translated to Ekklesia in Greek which both mean assembly, not church or synagogue.

---

We’re getting into pedantry here. The first “Christian organization” I joined is called “assembly of God”.

[Mr. Douglas]

There is no “New Testament body.”

---

Yes, there is:

http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/12-12.htm

[Mr. Douglas]

I admit that scripture is difficult to defend, but the best tool we have to defend it is scripture. You say it is man-made.

---

No. I’m not saying what we call scripture is “man made”.

Rather, I’m saying the word, “scripture”, is man made. What we Christians and Jews call “scripture” is the inspired word of God.

However, where we get in trouble with that is that, though we may believe a pastor, preacher, etc. is inspired by God, we don’t staple their sermons to the end of our bibles as “new scripture”. And what about people like me who have experienced actual miracles in our lives? Should what we say be considered “scripture”?

I agree that scripture does defend itself or, as I like to say, proves itself. I compare it to a book that claims to be a repair manual for a Craftsman v-twin lawn tractor. It proves itself when you apply it. It needs no other information as proof.

And when you apply it, it most definitly proves itself - The bible, that is.

I’ll be frank: I think people try to complicate the bible too much. It is like that old phrase about the game Go: A minute to learn, a lifetime to master. But the message really is simple. The important thing is that I don’t want to fall on the stumbling stone. I am saved from final death through God’s grace and the faith of Jesus. Everything else just solidifies that.

Also, the “law” is called, by Jesus, the Commandments. I see it as the ten commandments. That’s it. That’s all. And it is good. You are right that Sabbath is not Saturday, sunday, etc. It is God’s rest. And we keep it holy because we keep our rest, Jesus, holy.

[Mr. Douglas]

BTW, speaking of everything being in the bible and God’s fingerprint. I compare the bible to other books as one would compare a hologram on a glass plate to a photo on a glass plate.

When you break the photo glass, every piece contains a portion of the photo. When you break the hologram glass, every piece contains the entire image - from a certain perspective.

This thought process is the main thing that brought me to CI vs ECT. If there was equal evidence for both in the bible, one is forced to see which one most matches the personality of God in the bible. Someone could show me proof that my wife was stuffing her face with catfish at a fish fry last Friday and I would know that it is not true. Not only does she hate all food that comes out of the water, but it literally makes her gag.

You can look at the personality of the God of the old and new testaments and see how he handles his enemies. In every case, he destroys them. And this is, in fact what he says about the lost. And when you plug Romans 9 into the mix, suddenly the “cruelty” part of God so many people imagine simply vanishes. Even Pharaoh was able to enjoy his version of Ecclesiastes before his body died. Of course, he will be resurrected for the final destruction of the “him”, while those who are found written in the book of life will be resurrected to immortality.

[Mr. Douglas]

I admit that scripture is difficult to defend, but the best tool we have to defend it is scripture. You say it is man-made.

---

I completely agree. It is a life long endeavor.

[Mr. Douglas]

I realize that it is rare to move someone from his position.

---

It is not that rare for me. I’ve changed my position on a couple of major issues and a lot of minor ones. And in every case I went from a belief that “those that really studied the bible” knew and therefore it simply MUST be true, to studying on my own and changing my position.

The first to go was Pre-tribulation rapture. :-)

[Gamecock]

And doesn't make you transcendent, which is what we were talking about.

[Mr. Douglas]

I was just going with the dictionary meaning of the word.

I’ve never personally described myself as “transcendent”. Heck. I didn’t even know what the word meant. It’s not part of my everyday vocabulary. ;-)

[Mr. Douglas]

I read this definition: beyond or above the range of normal or merely physical human experience.

And I said, “Yep, I’ve experienced actual miracles, which are beyond or above the range of normal or merely physical human experience. I guess that makes me transcendent.” :-D

[editor-surveyor]

.
Constant dissimulation.

It won’t get you a ticket to the Last Trump.

They’re all reserved for Yisrael!
.

[editor-surveyor]

.

That covenant is with the house of Israel and the House of Judah, and those that sojourn with them.

It is definitely not with the imaginary NT “church.”

You should read what you post.
.

[Mr. Douglas]

True. It’s even simpler than that. John 3:16

At the end of the day, it really is that simple.

[Mr. Douglas]

You should read what you post.

---

I do.

[Seven_0]

The first to go was Pre-tribulation rapture. :-)

So, when do you think the rapture takes place. BTW Immortality has to be permanent or it is not immortality. A dead person could never say I used to be immortal.

[Mr. Douglas]

So, when do you think the rapture takes place.

---

I dunno. If I was a betting man I’d say Revelation 7 describes it. i.e. mid-trib or what is also known as post trib, pre-wrath.

[Mr. Douglas]

Immortality has to be permanent or it is not immortality. A dead person could never say I used to be immortal.

---

Can’t argue with that. It’s why the annihilationist position is also called CI (conditional immortality). Only the saved get it.

[Seven_0]

Do you think the 144,000 in Chapter Rev.7 will be left behind?