Having a good voice does not make one a good pastor or preacher. Sadly, that is all Stanley has.
His sermons are weak and shallow...his church's ministry reflects that. (Numbers mean very little.)
This is alos shown in his doctrinal compromises, most notably his view on women pastors. But, hey, if you have to re-interpret those pastoral passages to justify staying in ministry after divorce then of course you will allow women to be ministers. I am suprised he doesn't permit gay ministers, heck, he may. I doubt it, but if he had a consistent hermeneutic he would.
Andy, as far as I have heard, is not too fond of his pops' decision to stay in ministry. (Yay Andy.) But, I am not too fond of Andy'd ministry style either...but that is another discussion.
I appreciate your comments so much.
This is indeed why I am trying to see if this guy is at least mostly doctrinally sound.
I don't trust most TV Evangelists.
She first asked me about Joel Olsteen and John Hagee.
It didn't take but a few moments reading their doctrinal statements for me to warn her about them right away.
When I found Charles Stanley's site, his statement of faith was at least sound.
I did warn her that he was probably too ecumenical for my tastes and his sermons might be soft, but at least they would be pretty sound.
Since she is still young in her spiritual walk, she might find it beneficial.
I am hoping to get her to get involved in a physical body of believers, but at least for now she is reading her Bible and searching for some type of "instruction."
Thanks again for all the responses, it has been most helpful.
I've got a personal rule of thumb that keeps me sane.
I generally don't have a problem with religious broadcasts that are pretty much airings of church services.
I absolutely don't like religious "variety" type shows, like the former Oral Roberts type, or those set in a studio, like Hal Lindsay or Pat Robertson (I'm sure they have their niche, but I just don't acre for them).
Needless to say, I care very little for TBN type programming.
But again, if someone else finds spiritual value in them, then who am I to tell them otherwise?
Are you certain this is what Askjo was referring to?
If it is then at least I know what he meant.
However he could be referring to something else, since he didn't specify, I have no clue.
Therefore it isn't beneficial in helping me learn more about Charles Stanley.
Others have already brought up his divorce and I have read the verses in 1 Timothy, therefore his statement didn't add any further insight into any of it.
It was, as I said, not beneficial.
The Bible warns us against false teachers, so I feel I have a good example set before me to warn others.
I am certain that many people find spiritual value in these false teachers, but the question is, what spirit is it coming from?
I don't know much of anything about Andy Stanley.
However, if your cousin has a "boyfriend" who is "in the process of getting a divorce" then I would say that neither her nor his opinion about spiritual matters carries much weight.
I agree, but pretty much every public preacher has been called a false teacher.
Charles Stanley, Jerry Falwell, Adrian Rogers, D James Kennedy, Robert Schuller, Bill Hybels, John Hagee, Jack Hayford, to name a few.
In every one of those men, they all espouse at least one thing that I disagree with, or find no spiritual value in, but someone else might find spiritual value in them.
If the Holy Spirit is using these men, then it is not for me to judge based on the fact that the Holy Spirit isn't using them to speak to me.
Usually, when I find myself doing so, it is not because they're doing something ungodly, but because they're soing something that I wouldn't do in the same manner.
I have struggled with Charles' divorce and his staying in the ministry.
I do think there is a difference between being a pastor and a preacher (evangelist),
I know he is the Pastor of 1st Baptist in ATlanta, BUT he isn't MY pastor and I find his teaching to be very beneficial.
I do not think his messages are weak or shallow as JGrayhound says.
Ask Jo said:
Cringe ok everyone who has violated scripture... out of the pool!
Hey there is no one left!
I have read Charles Stanley's books for many years; and in fact, some were very instrumental in my conversion.
The bible is my first authority, but I have found his teachings to be very practical in helping me to live my faith.
Like all of us, he has has flaws; but as far as I can tell, he is sincerely doing all he can to lead others to Christ.
Unless someone is a member of Charles Stanley's congregation, it isn't anyone's business whether he is qualified to be a pastor or not.
That's up to that particular congregation to decide.
And then based on their decision you can decide if you want to fellowship with the members of that congregation or listen to Charles Stanley's preaching via TV, radio, or written publication.
This can be argued over endlessly but unless you are a member where he pastors, you're just flapping your gums with no real import.
I must say I agree with Ken here.
The Baptist Distinctive of local autonomy gives his congregation the right to decide if he's qualified to be their pastor.
Furthermore, they have the right guaranteed by the Distinctives to interpret biblical requirements for a pastor as they feel called.
IMO, every church has that right, not just the Baptists.