Andy Stanley and What Has NOT Been Talked About

Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary recently wrote an article on his blog about megachurches. In the article, he referenced an April 15 sermon (click on message 5: When Gracie Met Truthy) by Andy Stanley of North Point Community Church in Atlanta where Stanley seems to normalize homosexual behavior. After reading the article and listening to the sermon and then reading several other articles, what amazes me is what people weren’t upset about. Of course, many in the evangelical world would be upset about his apparent normalization and acceptance of homosexual behavior, but no one seemed to notice three bigger, underlying issues.

First, Stanley says that Jesus’ love was messy, inconsistent, unfair, and confusing. Granted, he sort of implied that these were from our perspective—but not really. Because he went on to say that when our love seems messy, inconsistent, unfair, and confusing, we must be doing it right. I would disagree. First, while things may have appeared messy, inconsistent, unfair, and confusing from the disciples’ or our point of view, they certainly were not from Jesus’ point of view. And we need to keep that in mind. Stanley says that when we try to figure it out, we are in danger of losing something. Again, I would disagree. We need to understand why Jesus was not inconsistent or unfair (from our point of view) so that we can accurately display God’s love as well. To imply that Jesus was inconsistent and unfair shows a lack of understanding about Jesus’ deity. He was not just a man who changed the rules. Certainly he related to different people in different ways, but he was perfectly consistent in his love, grace, truth, justice, and holiness.

Second, Stanley redefined two key theological terms: grace and truth. In giving a long list of things that grace means, he said, “Grace says, ‘You’re fine.’” But Grace does not say, “You’re fine.” In fact, grace is the loud and clear declaration that we are not fine. Grace is getting something we don’t deserve. If we are fine, we don’t need grace, and therefore, we don’t need God. This is a horrible representation of what grace is. He also said, in a long string of what truth means, that truth says, “You’ve got to work it out.” Truth does not say that in the Bible. Truth says, “You can’t work it out, but God can.” Stanley even pitted grace and truth against each other like two parents raising a child. While he didn’t use this analogy, I came across with the perception of good cop/bad cop sort of deal. But again, this is not correct. God is both grace and truth. They do not battle each other, and certainly grace is not untruth, as Stanley implied. Granted, Stanley did say, on more than one occasion, that Jesus was complete grace and complete truth, and he even had a nice visual to demonstrate this. But the previous long explanation about the differences between the two stayed in my mind as well, and they were what actually stuck with me more than the visual.

Finally, the issue of shepherd and sheep comes into play in the sermon. In the long story he told as his final illustration of the importance of grace and truth, a man and his male partner were allowed to be involved in some ministry team even though one of the men was still married. It took a conversation with the ex-wife of the other man with Andy Stanley and then a phone call to the satellite church for the men to be removed from the ministry team because of the adultery of the married man. How is it that two unmarried people, engaging in extra-marital sex, with both men committing adultery—one on his former wife, the other on his current wife—are allowed to be actively involved in ministry? Was there no one to ask questions? Had the church gotten so big, and desperate, for volunteers that any warm body could sign up to serve?

It appears that North Point is in danger in at least three ways. First, they have diminished the character of the Lord Jesus Christ. Second, they are teaching a false idea of two key theological terms: grace and truth. Third, they have lost control of the ability to monitor the spiritual fitness of  those who desire to serve in ministry. And if these issues aren’t dealt with, it will matter little what North Point’s view of homosexuality is.

The Integrity of the Sport

I have taken a self-imposed hiatus from blogging this semester to focus on other, necessary things (this is a side-line isn’t it?). But I read something today that I can’t pass up. In an age where people are only sorry if they get caught, it refreshes my soul to see someone do the right thing when they aren’t in danger of being caught. J.P. Hayes realized he had used an illegal ball in his round while qualifying for his tour card. He DQ’d himself. In this day and age, people don’t do that. They wait until caught, then deny it, spin it, blame others, and if faced with overwhelming evidence, might read a pre-prepared statement apologizing for their behavior—nothing like an apology in a monotone voice. 

Not Hayes: he realized he did the wrong thing, made a phone call that could conceivably cost him millions of dollars, and in the end new all was well. May his tribe increase.

A happy day in the blogosphere.

I ran across this blog while doing some follow up reading after my last post. Holly does a great job of talking about the demise of purity in our culture and in giving encouragement to teen girls in this area. A must read.

Sad day in the funnies

I’ve never been a huge fan of Doonesbury, mainly because I rarely find it funny. I realize it is a political cartoon, but since it gets stuck in the funnies section, I’m looking for a few laughs now and again. In addition to it being unfunny, I find the tone arrogant and condescending. Tomorrow’s addition, however, has sunk to new lows. The strip is about purity pledges. It seems a father and daughter are discussing the issue. She says,

Hmm…I wonder if I should consider a pledge like that…

He replies,

Maybe you should.

She then responds,

Oh, wait, I just remembered—too late!

The flippant attitude toward pre-marital sex bugs me. I suppose I should not be surprised. I don’t know why I would think Gary Trudeau would care about the morals of today’s youth with his blatant disrespect for many things American. With teen pregnancy on the rise and all of its consequences, maybe Trudeau should think twice about how his strips might come across. Or maybe he just thinks it’s all funny.

I’m sorry—I got caught.

Jesse Jackson had to apologize to Barack Obama for a crude comment he made when he thought the microphone was turned off. It seems Jackson doesn’t appreciate Obama spending time talking to the black community about morality. Once again, Jackson shows his lack of integrity. Would he have thought to apologize had he not been overheard? He later goes on to say that more important issues than morality threaten the black community like unemployment and the number of blacks in prison. Yet wouldn’t the morality issue deal with both of these to some degree? Jackson does not appear to be interested in integrity, thus Obama’s morality speeches would likely anger Jackson. Jackson is interested in saving face, not the black community.

The Conscience in Us All

When Nwoye, Okonkwo’s son, realizes that someone has been killed in Things Fall Apart, Achebe describes his reaction this way, “…something seemed to give way inside him, like the snapping of a tightened bow. He did not cry. He just hung limp. He had the same kind of feeling not long ago…They were returning home…when they heard the voice of an infant crying in the thick forest.… Nwoye had heard that twins were put in earthenware pots and thrown away in the forest.…a vague chill had descended on him and his head seemed to swell….”

Why would Nwoye possibly have had this reaction? If tribal tradition had stated this for all of Nwoye’s life, and if he had no opportunity to learn anything different, why would he feel this way about these types of deaths. What’s the big deal about the babies being left in the forest to die?

What Achebe describes so well is what all humans possess: conscience. We know right from wrong. Especially at an early age, we experience the fundamental truth that somewhere a morality exists. As we grow older, we can suppress that truth, but Achebe has thrust it in front of us here for all to see. 

But where does this come from? Why would Nwoye feel this way? He feels this way because God created humankind in His image. Paul describes this truth in Romans when he says that even people who do not know God or His laws have a conscience that bears witness to the truth. Nwoye’s conscience was bearing witness to him about the truth that rose above tribal tradition. 

I don’t know if Nwoye will suppress this truth, fight against it, or embrace it. I do know that he does not experience these things in a vacuum. People from all over the world join him in their knowledge of the inhumanity of killing innocents. And we turn our heads and keep walking. 

The humanists would have us think that morality is based upon majority rules, but morality abides in our hearts, placed there by a loving God. We can choose to ignore that if we wish, but that doesn’t make it go away.

I feel; therefore, I am.

Jake says, “That was morality; things that made you disgusted afterward.”

Jake would fit in well in our culture. Morality by feeling guides the conscience of the country, bringing about the culture wars: abortion, sex, free speech, hate speech, restricted speech, the environment, capital punishment, racism, sexism, etc. Whether or not you agree with the concepts outlined in the Ten Commandments, the removal of such a marker of morality throws open the door of ambiguity. I do not mean that some document like the Ten Commandments avoids all vagueness, yet without some solidified code, a republic, such as ours, governs by feeling.

One may argue this point by saying that we are governed by a “majority rules” system. We must not forget that this is a republic not a democracy. Rules are rarely voted on by the masses. Even then, do you think the majority of the masses make their decisions based upon what is best for all or what is logical or how they feel? What about the senators, congressmen, and judges who make decisions? Are they not swayed by feeling? Oh, they may couch their rulings in the language of law or precedent or logic, but were it so clear cut, dissent would be minimal. Our country, for good or ill, is governed by feeling. 

That is why laws change. Peoples’ perceptions change. Television producer Yvette Lee Bowser said this, “Maybe if we can have a good laugh, we’ll all be less uptight about it.” She was referring to the promotion of an interracial show. Her interviewer then asked, “Sort of like what Will and Grace has done for gay        issues?”  I am not claiming some Hollywood secret homosexual agenda; I am just stating that we change as we become accustomed to ideas. And the feelings of this country have changed in the last 50 years about a lot of things: race, sex, and the environment seemingly being the hot topics at this time. Education has some effect on people. Logical arguments have some effect on people, but getting people involved emotionally has the largest effect.

We live in a secular society. The United States was set up as a secular society. To argue differently is to twist the facts. Now, a vast majority of those who made up the society in those days were religious and held to certain morals. But to say that because the people were religious equaled a religious government is a non sequitur. The views of the people of this country have changed. Therefore, it appears that our government is more secular. 

So, Jake is right, not just about himself, but about our country as well. Yet, Jake really wouldn’t fit in here well. You see, things that disgusted him, might not disgust us today. That is why it is important to have a marker of morality that is less whimsical than my feelings. For me, that is the Bible. Is it immune from vagueness? Certainly not. Is it fraught with ambiguity and discrepancy as some claim? Certainly not. Do I understand it all perfectly? No. Does that invalidate it as a useful guide? By no means! I must look through a Biblical lens to determine my stance on any issue. Do any other lenses come into play? Certainly. The Church has an impact. The society and culture I am in have a say as well.

Feelings, however, are poor guides and fuzzy lenses.