Andy Stanley’s tweet about the Bible is seductive and harmful: Can One's Personal Experience Supersede Scripture?

The recent now-deleted tweet by Andy Stanley, son of famed pastor emeritus Charles Stanley of the First Baptist Church, Atlanta, reads:

“The Christian faith doesn’t rise and fall on the accuracy of 66 ancient documents. It rises and falls on the identity of a single individual: Jesus of Nazareth.”

Stanley’s tweet was taken from a sermon he preached on March 6 at Browns Bridge Church in Cumming, Georgia.

When first reading the tweet on social media, I was saddened and sickened. This kind of statement was all too familiar to me. I had often heard it made by the moderates and liberals who were in control of the Southern Baptist Convention back in the '80s. I had defended the faith against this kind of approach to the Scriptures in the Baptist Associations where I had served — a time when my support for the Bible as divine and totally without error was in the minority and marginalized.

This kind of doctrinal error is what conservatives worked and sacrificed to save the Southern Baptist Convention from and succeeded. Moreover, other denominations that embraced what Stanley was teaching ended up on the trash heap of spiritual impotence or blatant apostasy.

It was, therefore, quite painful for me to hear a prominent preacher with the considerable influence of Stanley, one who has affirmed his own belief in inerrancy, declare something so contrary to that affirmation.

Unfortunately, Andy Stanley’s view of the Bible is not uncommon today in many seminaries and various mainline denominations that were once faithful. It holds if one argues for the highest view of Scripture as the Church did in the past, then one is in danger of a form of idolatry, elevating the Bible above Jesus, and therefore, guilty of the sin of Bible worship. In other words, you can make the Bible even more important than Jesus. You can give the Bible a prominence the Lord himself didn’t give it.

This is a seductive and harmful argument for those who may not know any better. It’s really a departure from the doctrine handed down by the Church, which has always maintained Christ, the Living Word, so identified himself with the Written Word, the Holy Scriptures, that no teacher can diminish the authority of one without also equally diminishing the authority of the other.

No one ever held a higher view of Scripture than Jesus did. In fact, over and again, Jesus encouraged everyone to judge his entire person and work by what the Scriptures said. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus declared he didn’t come to oppose or supersede the Scriptures, but to fulfill them exactly — completely — to fulfill every “jot and tittle” (Mt. 5:17-20).

Years ago, after leaving the pastorate to become the Christian Action League’s executive director, I joined a church where a man came before the congregation as a pastoral candidate. First, the candidate made a general statement about his doctrinal beliefs and church polity and then fielded questions from the audience.

One statement the candidate made was a red flag for me. He said he believed Southern Baptists had elevated the Bible above Jesus. So, before the entire church, I asked him to please explain what he meant.

To the point of embarrassment, the candidate kept avoiding a direct answer to the question by talking about things that weren’t pertinent. When he finally got around to addressing it, he did so in vague generalities, which essentially amounted to no answer at all.

At last, I sought to pin him down and asked: “Please tell us plainly. Do you believe the Bible is the infallible and inerrant Word of God? Yes or No?” His response was honest, but revealing when he replied, “No, I don’t.”

At this point, the candidate became very angry and began to attack my person with insults, declaring he believed the Bible as much as me. I responded that not only did he not believe the Bible as much as me, but he didn’t believe it as much as the people in that church. I then said to him, “You believe the Bible contains the Word of God, but you don’t believe it’s all the Word of God. Correct?” He acknowledged my assessment of his beliefs was accurate.

“Well, I agree with the candidate,” one lady said as she jumped to her feet to defend him. “He’s right! I think our denomination has wrongly given more prominence to the Scriptures than to Jesus.” To which I replied to her, “Please tell me how any of us can know anything authoritative about Jesus outside of the Bible?”

“Experience?” I responded. “And by what standard shall we measure the reality or truth of one’s experience without a Bible that does not err, and is authoritative in everything?” I asked. “How can we tell whether our experience is from God or the devil? Are we to believe our experience can never lead us astray — that our experience will never lead us to a counterfeit Christ?”

No one said anything further and the candidate withdrew his name for consideration, saying he could never be in a church with someone like me. Others, however, argued that I had just saved the church from many troubles and possible failure.

The crux of the matter is abundantly clear for those willing to think and look to the Scriptures. What Andy Stanley espouses is not what Jesus believed and taught about Scriptural authority. Let’s not forget Jesus Himself submitted to the Scriptures. Our Lord so identified Himself and his ministry with Scripture that he affirmed to the degree that one accepts the Scriptures is the degree to which one may know Him.

It should trouble us greatly anytime someone holds a different view of the Written Word than the one held by the Living Word, the Lord Jesus Christ. It ultimately leads to making our own opinions, beliefs and experiences the authority rather than God’s revelation. Such only leads to error, compromise, and a falling away from the faith.

The five solas state that Christians are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, as revealed by Scripture alone, to the glory of God alone.

You make Mary cry...

Jesus said "Without Me you can do nothing". In this crisis which looms ahead of us, Our Lady has told us that we need Her help, Her intercession.

We must ask for Her help with the Rosary and the Scapular.

At Fatima , Our Lady told us very plainly that "Only I can help you". Today more than ever is this so true.

Pray the Rosary and sacrifice yourself for Our Lady.

I urge you to also make some sacrifices as Our Lady of Fatima asked us. For those who are able, do some fasting. If you can, abstain from meat by eating meat only during one meal a day. Try to do this for two days, even ten days or 30 days. Of course we should abstain totally from meat every Friday.

Jesus and Mary — Our Hope

It is so urgent that we reach as many souls as possible before it is too late. Let us be of good cheer and remember the words of Jesus to each of us, "It's never too late to have recourse to Jesus and Mary." That is why it is so important to reach the many millions of souls who do not know this, and who do not know the grave dangers lying in wait for their souls.

No, we must never lose hope. Mary is our hope. She can obtain for us what we cannot by ourselves. Read what St. Alphonsus has to say regarding confidence in Our Lady's intercession in "Mary Leads Her Servants to Heaven". Father Manelli also reminds us of the importance of devotion to Our Lady. (See "Hail Mary, Full of Grace"). Our Blessed Mother tells us to turn to Her in confidence. She tells us repeatedly to ask Her intercession through the frequent fervent praying of the Rosary. (See "The Rosary"). She tells us we must pray the Rosary every day. She wants us to pray it many times a day.

http://Fatima.org/crusader/cr38/cr38pg2.asp

Luther specifically stated in the preface to his Bible regarding the apocrypha- “ These books are not held equal to the Scriptures, but are useful and good to read.”

The Luther Bible (German: Lutherbibel) is a German language Bible translation from Hebrew and ancient Greek by Martin Luther.

The New Testament was first published in September 1522 and the complete Bible, containing the Old and New Testaments with Apocrypha, in 1534.

Luther continued to make improvements to the text until 1545.

It was the first full translation of the Bible into German which made use of Greek texts, not just the Latin Vulgate translation.^[4]

However, according to the updated 2017 translation of the Luther Bible published by the Evangelical Church in Germany noted that "Luther translated according to the Latin text".

Luther did not speak Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic well enough and relied heavily on other scholars for assistance such as Melanchthon.

The text basis of the New Testament was the Greek version recently published by the Dutch Catholic humanist Erasmus of Rotterdam and called the Novum Instrumentum omne.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther_Bible

Here goes another futile post pointing out the truth.

You two are emblematic of the fact that American-style Fundamentalist low-church Protestantism and the ancient liturgical high churches have absolutely nothing in common whatsoever. Nothing. They are two different religions. One has roots and the other doesn't; one makes sense and the other doesn't.

I once read on an Eastern Orthodox site that the Orthodox Church really doesn't have a bible at all. And you know, that's true. The Bible is simply not important to the historical chrstian churches. The "Bible preaching" encountered in American low-church Protestantism didn't exist until American low-church Protestantism existed.

I have often argued with Protestants on this site that "Bible Protestantism" has absolutely no roots in the ancient chrstian past at all. And it doesn't. All one has to do is to read the very earliest (pre-Constantine) fathers to see that they got their religion from their church and not from a bible. The idea that there was once an ancient American low-church Protestant which was the true chrstianity from its foundation until 313 is one of the most ridiculous myths in existence. But people can't give it up because the worldview of American low-church Protestantism cannot be transferred to any of the ancient churches. It has to be completely rejected before anyone can embrace true historical chrstianity. For example, only low-church Protestantism offers absolute assurance of salvation through a legal loophole rather than through mystical incorporation into a church and participation in its rituals and ceremonies (and good works). Since the ancient churches cannot set one's mind at ease, there are people who are simply unable to embrace them. American low-church Protestantism is true because it has to be (else everyone is going to Hell), not because it actually existed historically.

However, my attempts to make Protestants see reality is in no way an endorsement of actual historical chrstianity. Far from it. When one sees how utterly alien actual chrstianity is, when one sees it does nothing but replace a Biblical ritual, ceremonial, and legal code with a post-Biblical one . . . there is only one conclusion. Chrstianity has never been a Biblical religion. The only truly Biblical religion is Torah Judaism, the religion founded by G-d Himself (and not by a prophet or a messiah) and which was practiced until chrstianity usurped its place, remains the only place to turn. Unlike historical chrstianity, there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever about the Biblical, and Divine, origin of Judaism. And furthermore, it is much more of a "book religion" than chrstianity ever was (until people invented a "Biblical chrstianity").

I want you all to notice something. The ancient chrstian churches constantly compare "Bible Protestantism" to islam, partly because the charge is so emotionally hurtful to its (very anti-islamic) targets. You never hear them compare it to Judaism, do you? That's because it would be taken as a compliment, and the intention of the people making the charge is to cause emotional pain. Traditionally, the Torah precedes the created universe. It was written by G-d 974 generations before creation in letters of black fire on a scroll of white fire. It was dictated to Moses (an idea liturgical chrstianity considers heretical) letter-for-letter. It is written on special scrolls according to complex rules and laws to ensure its exact and correct transmission, so that every kosher Torah Scroll is identical to those written by Moses and given to the Tribes before his death. Even what appear to be "mistakes" must be carefully preserved and never corrected. This assures us that no change has ever been made in the kosher text.

I am not advocating conversion to Judaism itself here (which isn't for everyone), but rather to the Noahide Laws which is the true religion for all non-Jews. However, like every other religion in existence except for low-church Protestantism, it doesn't assure salvation. And that is the reason most of you will cling to "Bible Protestantism" until you die. The need for assurance outweighs all historical facts.

Finally, while the ancient churches didn't invent radical Biblical criticism, you can see that it fits them like a glove. Small wonder they have all but universally adopted it as dogma. I suppose if radical Protestants hadn't invented it, the ancient churches themselves would have eventually. They are simply too unrelentingly hostile to the Hebrew Bible, which gives the lie to all their claims.

May it be G-d's will that these words help someone.

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.