Andy Stanley

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Why assume i didn't listen to it? I in fact did, and can see where these perceptions "can" be formed from...but until it is clarified what "it seems" he was saying I'm not jumping on the bandwagon just yet. Now, if he comes out and says that his only problem was the adultery and not the homosexuality, I will also publicly refute his argument and reasoning. Too much reading between the lines and not giving the benefit of the doubt first until proven guilty. Guarantee this would not be the case if Piper or MacArthur said the identical words.

For me...."Oh yes it would my brother" & because I do not play favorites. I get very upset when anyone misrepresenting my Lord. Darkness is Darkness & Sin is Sin!

 

[SolaSaint]

I watched the sermon from Andy and now I can say my question from another post is answered. I couldn't sit under his teaching or preaching and would really have to warn anyone who used his materials. How can he be so definitive about holding someone accountable for adultry when ignoring homosexuality? I wonder what his daddy thinks of this? Very sad indead.. I was considering attending a SS where they use his materials and thankfully Iconoclast posted this,, Thanks Brother.

 

[SolaSaint]

I'm wondering if either Mohler or iconoclast have reached out to Stanley in private first before publicly posting this, as is the biblical model.

It's also a sin to do what has been done by both Mohler and iconoclast. The irony from the blog is all the "if" and "it seems"...

I'm going to have to disagree Webdog.. Bringing this to our attention is the right thing. It wasn't something no one was to see, it was a public video. I feel if Iconoclast had not brought this to our attention would be more of a sin then to believe as you do. Seriously did you watch or listen to the sermon?

 

[webdog]

I'm going to have to disagree Webdog.. Bringing this to our attention is the right thing. It wasn't something no one was to see, it was a public video. I feel if Iconoclast had not brought this to our attention would be more of a sin then to believe as you do. Seriously did you watch or listen to the sermon?

My last post should answer your question...

 

[preachinjesus]

I've listened to the while sermon and believe that Mohler, et al, are making a mountain out of a molehill. Stanley's point in the message seems clear (if you listen to the whole thing and not a slice) that we are to seek reconciliation even in the midst of dramatic, hurtful sin.

Andy Stanley is dealing with a ministry context not unlike many of us but far removed from the isolated walls and halls of a seminary campus. (yes I mean that the way it sounds) he has made (and does make) in the whole sermon very clear what sin is, and what grace is.

This is another example of how when someone who is not articulating something exactly like another expects can be dragged into unnecessary and ridiculous arguments.

 

[annsni]

I watched the sermon from Andy and now I can say my question from another post is answered. I couldn't sit under his teaching or preaching and would really have to warn anyone who used his materials. How can he be so definitive about holding someone accountable for adultry when ignoring homosexuality? I wonder what his daddy thinks of this? Very sad indead.. I was considering attending a SS where they use his materials and thankfully Iconoclast posted this,, Thanks Brother.

I wouldn't avoid a SS that utilizes his material because honestly, as I've looked at his teaching, he's good and I believe that this will be cleared up quickly. But the materials that are out for classes are very good.

 

[quantumfaith]

I've listened to the while sermon and believe that Mohler, et al, are making a mountain out of a molehill. Stanley's point in the message seems clear (if you listen to the whole thing and not a slice) that we are to seek reconciliation even in the midst of dramatic, hurtful sin.

Andy Stanley is dealing with a ministry context not unlike many of us but far removed from the isolated walls and halls of a seminary campus. (yes I mean that the way it sounds) he has made (and does make) in the whole sermon very clear what sin is, and what grace is.

This is another example of how when someone who is not articulating something exactly like another expects can be dragged into unnecessary and ridiculous arguments.

Good point preachinjesus. The same sort of sentiment that you express here is also expressed by some on the blogs which trail the article. I myself will be looking for some clarification.

 

[Havensdad]

My last post should answer your question...

I agree with the others. This is not a Matthew 18 issue. This is not some random YouTube video. Andy Stanley's video's get checked and edited before they are uploaded. If this were just a mistake, it should have been caught.

The teaching is out there. It is public. It needs to be addressed publicly. There is no scriptural warrant for addressing this privately, and allowing thousands of people to be deceived without response...

 

[SolaSaint]

For those who didn't I would also like to see everyone read all of Mohler's article on the issue. It is very well written and full of grace towards Stanley.

 

[SolaSaint]

After doing a few quick searchs online for Andy Stanley I see where he could probably be labeled Emergent. He associates with a few that I tend to stay away from like Brian McLaren, Rob Bell, Donald Miller and yes even Rick Warren. I know I will get the normal jabs from the libs in here, but birds of a feather flock together. lol

I think I will tread very carefully concerning any study materials by Andy.

 

[Iconoclast]

After doing a few quick searchs online for Andy Stanley I see where he could probably be labeled Emergent. He associates with a few that I tend to stay away from like Brian McLaren, Rob Bell, Donald Miller and yes even Rick Warren. I know I will get the normal jabs from the libs in here, but birds of a feather flock together. lol

I think I will tread very carefully concerning any study materials by Andy.

I really do not know much about him.This needs to be explained now that it is out in the public square.

Corinthians 5

1It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.

2And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.

3For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,

4In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,

5To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

6Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?

 

[quantumfaith]

I really do not know much about him.This needs to be explained now that it is out in the public square.

One of the rare occasions I am in agreement. I am looking forward to some clarification, until then my "respect" for Andy will remain. Here are some of my observations.

1. Often times the harshest critics of others is not always motivated by love and grace, but to score political (theological) points. History is replete with such criticisms, only to find some time later, that the loudest critic had things in their lives equally as shocking. If we had God's ability to see past the veneer and into the depths of mens hearts and souls, even those of immense respectability like Al Mohler (pick your scholar) we would most assuredly blush at the things that often reside there.

2. At the moment, I find it interesting that the criticism is centered around what was "not said", that being a condemnation of conduct. Although the more general sin of adultery was in fact addressed.

3. As I listened, I personally took the point of the message to be the collision of two truths of scripture and our lives, Grace and Reality, and how that plays out. When we stray into sin, we want Grace, when we feel things are "all good" in our lives, we love to point out the sin in others feeling as though we might be above such.

4. Not sure I see (understand) the application of Matthew 18 here. I don't see Andy "sinning" against anyone here. As for whether he applied it in the circumstance he spoke, do we know he did not?

5. If Andy (Northpoint Ministries) takes a stated position that in any way winks at, is "tolerant of", excuses, dismisses etc the sin of homosexuality, that would be a "game changer" for me personally.

 

[annsni]

After doing a few quick searchs online for Andy Stanley I see where he could probably be labeled Emergent. He associates with a few that I tend to stay away from like Brian McLaren, Rob Bell, Donald Miller and yes even Rick Warren. I know I will get the normal jabs from the libs in here, but birds of a feather flock together. lol

I think I will tread very carefully concerning any study materials by Andy.

I do not believe that he "associates" with any of these. Can you show me where you found that info?

 

[jaigner]

After doing a few quick searchs online for Andy Stanley I see where he could probably be labeled Emergent.

You're joking, right?

I'm not a fan of his, but the emergent crowd wouldn't claim him and neither would he claim them.

 

[SolaSaint]

5. If Andy (Northpoint Ministries) takes a stated position that in any way winks at, is "tolerant of", excuses, dismisses etc the sin of homosexuality, that would be a "game changer" for me personally

I really liked the sermon by Stanley except for the toleration of homosexuality. He seems like a great teacher/preacher. I wish I could communicate like him. However after your comment above I must ask, did you listen or watch the sermon? If so, didn't you come away with the feeling he did wink at or tolerate these two homosexual men to hold positions within his church system?

 

[preachinjesus]

After doing a few quick searchs online for Andy Stanley I see where he could probably be labeled Emergent. He associates with a few that I tend to stay away from like Brian McLaren, Rob Bell, Donald Miller and yes even Rick Warren. I know I will get the normal jabs from the libs in here, but birds of a feather flock together. lol

If you believe this you don't understand what Emergent is and what it isn't. So please stop making accusations that are both baseless and slanderous. Rick and Don aren't Emergent either.

If you don't like someone's approach to ministry that is fine, but what in the world are you doing for the Gospel? Too often we are quick to throw stones, i.e. Mohler's article, without getting facts and hearing everything. Andy has a really good ministry (just like Rick Warren...well here we go) that is reaching a lot of people who are far from God and bringing them back into fellowship with God through Jesus Christ. The crazy thing is guys like Rick and Andy preach Christ more clearly then a lot of others and have built wonderful ministries that go beyond where a lot of their detractors sit.

Listen, I'll call a rube a rube. I don't like Brian McLaren's theology or his official stance of non-engagement when asked specific questions. Brian is a leader in a group of people that aren't leading people to the Gospel, but instead creating an excuse to not preach the Gospel. Andy and Rick aren't there. They aren't anything like them.

I think I will tread very carefully concerning any study materials by Andy.

NP Ministries is a good publication arm and they put out a lot of good stuff. I use his stuff a lot in our ministries. He is trustworthy.

 

[preachinjesus]

5. If Andy (Northpoint Ministries) takes a stated position that in any way winks at, is "tolerant of", excuses, dismisses etc the sin of homosexuality, that would be a "game changer" for me personally

How is he tolerant? Show me. How is he accepting? Show me. Because in that clip he isn't saying anything about homosexuality except that he is using an extreme example of hurt and harm to talk about how we extend grace to people.

I actually know a lot about how Northpoint runs their ministries and they are anything but accomodating to sin. Andy's point, when listened to as a part of his whole sermon, is really good. He isn't condoning immoral behavior but pointing out that even in terribly immoral behavior there is still room for grace.

Does he say it like you would? No, but he's probably got a different context than you do.

I really liked the sermon by Stanley except for the toleration of homosexuality. He seems like a great teacher/preacher. I wish I could communicate like him. However after your comment above I must ask, did you listen or watch the sermon? If so, didn't you come away with the feeling he did wink at or tolerate these two homosexual men to hold positions within his church system?

Where in the WORLD did he say he tolerated a position for these two guys? Listen to it again, does he say that? Or does he say that they handled the situation in accordance to their polity, removed them from the greeter team, and handled the situation appropriately. (Actually they handled it in accordance with Matthew 18, unlike Andy's current detractors.)

I think there is ALOT of inference going on here and a lot of people making wild assumptions about a good man and a good ministry that are based in seeking to imperil a ministry and harm the spread of the Gospel.

Perhaps this is the most essential point of the whole thing: his story isn't about homosexuality. It is about how we as Christians must extend grace to people who hurt us, even to those who hurt us so badly and in such a terrible way that it destroys our family.

I'm sad sickened by how so many want to pile on criticism so quickly without listening and prudently thinking.

 

[mont974x4]

I've listened to the while sermon and believe that Mohler, et al, are making a mountain out of a molehill. Stanley's point in the message seems clear (if you listen to the whole thing and not a slice) that we are to seek reconciliation even in the midst of dramatic, hurtful sin.

Andy Stanley is dealing with a ministry context not unlike many of us but far removed from the isolated walls and halls of a seminary campus. (yes I mean that the way it sounds) he has made (and does make) in the whole sermon very clear what sin is, and what grace is.

This is another example of how when someone who is not articulating something exactly like another expects can be dragged into unnecessary and ridiculous arguments.

:thumbsup: Agreed. Last night I watched a 45 sermon by Andy on sexual sin and there is no way he is making an excuse for it. In fact, using 1 Cor 6, he pointed out how sexual sin is unlike any other in the damage it does to the people involved.

 

[annsni]

How is he tolerant? Show me. How is he accepting? Show me. Because in that clip he isn't saying anything about homosexuality except that he is using an extreme example of hurt and harm to talk about how we extend grace to people.

I actually know a lot about how Northpoint runs their ministries and they are anything but accomodating to sin. Andy's point, when listened to as a part of his whole sermon, is really good. He isn't condoning immoral behavior but pointing out that even in terribly immoral behavior there is still room for grace.

Does he say it like you would? No, but he's probably got a different context than you do.



Where in the WORLD did he say he tolerated a position for these two guys? Listen to it again, does he say that? Or does he say that they handled the situation in accordance to their polity, removed them from the greeter team, and handled the situation appropriately. (Actually they handled it in accordance with Matthew 18, unlike Andy's current detractors.)

I think there is ALOT of inference going on here and a lot of people making wild assumptions about a good man and a good ministry that are based in seeking to imperil a ministry and harm the spread of the Gospel.

Perhaps this is the most essential point of the whole thing: his story isn't about homosexuality. It is about how we as Christians must extend grace to people who hurt us, even to those who hurt us so badly and in such a terrible way that it destroys our family.

I'm sad sickened by how so many want to pile on criticism so quickly without listening and prudently thinking.

Additionally, he didn't go into what might be happening behind the scenes of this "couple" being counseled. Also, are they saved? If these two men are not saved, then why are we working on behavior rather than the heart?

I really do feel that there is more to this story than what was said in 10 minutes in a message. You cannot go off on tangents and while it would have been good for him to say something like "we're not talking about their sin of homosexuality - that's a whole other message - but instead we're talking about grace here" or something like that. But not every pastor puts footnotes in their message as they speak. I know that there will be a statement soon from Northpoint and Stanley and I'd love to hear what he says.

 

[webdog]

I agree with the others. This is not a Matthew 18 issue. This is not some random YouTube video. Andy Stanley's video's get checked and edited before they are uploaded. If this were just a mistake, it should have been caught.

The teaching is out there. It is public. It needs to be addressed publicly. There is no scriptural warrant for addressing this privately, and allowing thousands of people to be deceived without response...

Already addressed that as well.