If Andy Stanley were the "Evangelical Pope"

[SovereignGrace]

Oh ho ho...just when it can't get worse!!


[video]

When ask if Pastors should stop being called shepherds he said "Absolutely!! That word needs to go away."

 

[SovereignGrace]

A spotlight is a point of emphasis. Something outside the spotlight isn't necessarily unimportant.

For this instance, the Bible points us to Jesus. The Bible is indispensable, but Jesus is Lord and worthy of worship.

To run with the analogy a bit aside, the Bible IS the spotlight in that it draws us to Jesus, where our eyes should be fixed. We couldn't see him without the spotlight, but we always remember that the spotlight is the means, not the end.

But without the bible, we have no knowledge of the Christ or His resurrection. I have zero clue why you blokes are trying to defend his unbiblical stance...

 

[StefanM]

But without the bible, we have no knowledge of the Christ or His resurrection. I have zero clue why you blokes are trying to defend his unbiblical stance...

Because I think he just misspoke. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't know his heart, and I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. He does have a tendency to shoot his mouth off a bit. I'll grant you that.

In other news, in my last post, what was the cause of disagreement? I just offered a plausible, biblically-based explanation, using a spotlight analogy. Unless you think it's unbiblical to imagine the Bible as a means of pointing to Christ, I don't see the connection.

 

[SovereignGrace]

We know Christ via the scriptures. We did not learn about him by reading Aesop's Fables, Mein Kempf, Moby Dick, or any other secular book. To take the focus off of scriptures is to take the focus off of Christ.

Look, this is not a LS frothing at the mouth because someone else disagees with him.

He has teetered upon g@y-affirmation...
He wants the spotlight off scriptures, which also takes spotlight off Christ..
He says Pastors should not be called a shepherd...CEO is more apt...

 

[Internet Theologian]

Imagine Paul telling this to Timotheus. The Word is so replete with commands as to sticking to the Word, focusing on the Word, preaching the Word that this stance is nothing more than a subtle departure from the faith. There is no Scriptural support for Andy Stanley's position whatsoever, yet people in here are fighting for his cause and his position. LOL!!!!

 

[StefanM]

I can't help but wonder if everyone's own words were scrutinized to this degree that we all would have said something close enough to being "off" to get crucified for it.

 

[JonC]

Andy said he would ask pastors and preachers to take the spotlight off the bible and put the focus on Jesus and His resurrection? How do you put focus on Jesus and His resurrection? How do we know these to be true, both Jesus and His resurrection? By the bible Mr. Stanley wants to take the spotlight off of. This is a self-defeating stance.

Think about your post here, brother. How exactly would a pastor mean that he would take the spotlight off of the Bible and on Jesus and the Resurrection? The only logical answer (as our knowledge of both Jesus and the Resurrection is based on Scripture) is that Stanley is referring to a Christ centered approach and not ignoring Scripture.

You confirm this in your own post - it is impossible to toss out Scripture and to focus on Christ and the Resurrection. So it is pretty obvious that Stanley is not taking that approach. Yet you continue to insist that somehow the logical interpretation is not the method of which the pastor speaks.

So you tell us...since you reject what some of us see as Stanley's logical intent (the priority of a Christ-centered approach to Scripture), how exactly are you suggesting the pastor is going to focus on Christ and the Resurrection apart from Scripture? If you have no answer, then perhaps you should consider the obvious - that you have misjudged his intent and are approaching the sin of gossip about another child of God.

 

[SovereignGrace]

I can't help but wonder if everyone's own words were scrutinized to this degree that we all would have said something close enough to being "off" to get crucified for it.

Words have weight Brother. Pastors are to be held to higher standards as they are shepherds of the local flock. But Mr. Stanley wants to be a CEO and not a shepherd. That is 'Clifford the Big Red Flag.'

 

[Internet Theologian]

I can't help but wonder if everyone's own words were scrutinized to this degree that we all would have said something close enough to being "off" to get crucified for it.

You're over reacting and acting on mere emotion here. Give us some Scriptural support for Stanley's 'take the spotlight off the Bible' for us all.

 

[Internet Theologian]

One thing duly noted that has come to light with this topic is that many simply are not Sola Scriptura. No wonder our churches are in such a mess.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Think about your post here, brother. How exactly would a pastor mean that he would take the spotlight off of the Bible and on Jesus and the Resurrection? The only logical answer (as our knowledge of both Jesus and the Resurrection is based on Scripture) is that Stanley is referring to a Christ centered approach and not ignoring Scripture.

You confirm this in your own post - it is impossible to toss out Scripture and to focus on Christ and the Resurrection. So it is pretty obvious that Stanley is not taking that approach. Yet you continue to insist that somehow the logical interpretation is not the method of which the pastor speaks.

So you tell us...since you reject what some of us see as Stanley's logical intent (the priority of a Christ-centered approach to Scripture), how exactly are you suggesting the pastor is going to focus on Christ and the Resurrection apart from Scripture? If you have no answer, then perhaps you should consider the obvious - that you have misjudged his intent and are approaching the sin of gossip about another child of God.

There is no gossip...I used his OWN WORDS. How can you, me or anyone else be Christ centered when we take the spotlight off of the very scriptures He inspired???

 

[JonC]

Imagine Paul telling this to Timotheus. The Word is so replete with commands as to sticking to the Word, focusing on the Word, preaching the Word that this stance is nothing more than a subtle departure from the faith. There is no Scriptural support for Andy Stanley's position whatsoever, yet people in here are fighting for his cause and his position. LOL!!!!

Imagine Paul telling a church that he has known nothing among them but Christ and Him crucified. How dare Paul stand before the church and say that he has not known Scripture (the Old Testament), or that he hasn't known Moses and the Law, or Creation, or anything else except Christ and Him crucified.

If you apply the logic of your conclusions here to Paul then you would probably be considered a heretic. I think that you may need to revisit the topic.

 

[Internet Theologian]

There is no gossip...I used his OWN WORDS. How can you, me or anyone else be Christ centered when we take the spotlight off of the very scriptures He inspired???

Gossip? Did you say Gossip? You're kiddin' me, Gossip? (said in the tone of Jim Mora)

I'd say someone is clueless as to what Gossip is. You're not gossiping brother, but I note that his words are supported, and you are being falsely accused.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Think about your post here, brother. How exactly would a pastor mean that he would take the spotlight off of the Bible and on Jesus and the Resurrection? The only logical answer (as our knowledge of both Jesus and the Resurrection is based on Scripture) is that Stanley is referring to a Christ centered approach and not ignoring Scripture.

You confirm this in your own post - it is impossible to toss out Scripture and to focus on Christ and the Resurrection. So it is pretty obvious that Stanley is not taking that approach. Yet you continue to insist that somehow the logical interpretation is not the method of which the pastor speaks.

So you tell us...since you reject what some of us see as Stanley's logical intent (the priority of a Christ-centered approach to Scripture), how exactly are you suggesting the pastor is going to focus on Christ and the Resurrection apart from Scripture? If you have no answer, then perhaps you should consider the obvious - that you have misjudged his intent and are approaching the sin of gossip about another child of God.

Mr. Stanley was the one who said to take the spotlight off of scriptures, not I. How can you tell someone about the Christ and His resurrection by taking the spotlight off of scripture?

 

[Internet Theologian]

Imagine Paul

'

Your post is non sequitur, that, and I have no desire to have any dialog with you. I'll pass.

 

[JonC]

There is no gossip...I used his OWN WORDS. How can you, me or anyone else be Christ centered when we take the spotlight off of the very scriptures He inspired???

Umm....using someone's own words is not the same as being true to their intent. It is also not the same as refraining from gossip.

To answer your question, it depends on the context. I do not think that Stanley is implying what you seem to want him to imply. My focus is not on Scripture for the sake of focusing on Scripture. I intently study Scripture so that I can know the Object of Scripture, so that I can more deeply know God. I believe that this is what Stanley is saying. His error, IMHO, is that he assumed his words would be taken in a Christian context.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Gossip? Did you say Gossip? You're kiddin' me, Gossip? (said in the tone of Jim Mora)

I'd say someone is clueless as to what Gossip is. You're not gossiping brother, but I note that his words are supported, and you are being falsely accused.

I guess he uses Aesop's Fables to lead ppl to Christ?

 

[JonC]

'

Your post is non sequitur, that, and I have no desire to have any dialog with you. I'll pass.

That is not what non sequitur means. Your inability or unwillingness to answer for your position has no effect on the argument itself (you would have done better to have simply remained silent).

 

[SovereignGrace]

Umm....using someone's own words is not the same as being true to their intent. It is also not the same as refraining from gossip.

To answer your question, it depends on the context. I do not think that Stanley is implying what you seem to want him to imply. My focus is not on Scripture for the sake of focusing on Scripture. I intently study Scripture so that I can know the Object of Scripture, so that I can more deeply know God. I believe that this is what Stanley is saying. His error, IMHO, is that he assumed his words would be taken in a Christian context.

And this is the epitome of circular reasoning. To take the focus off of scripture and put it on the Christ, when the only knowledge we have of the Christ is via the scripture. Aye ya ya...

 

[SovereignGrace]

One thing duly noted that has come to light with this topic is that many simply are not Sola Scriptura. No wonder our churches are in such a mess.

Bingo!!