Andy Stanley has greatly influenced my life. Several of his books (Next Generation Leader, Visioneering, Communicating for a Change) have made a huge impact on how I think, lead, and even how I preach and communicate. But over the last couple of years, Andy has taught some things that I have a very hard time reconciling. Very recently this has happened again. As a pastor and preacher myself, but also as someone who knows the level of influence that Andy has and the magnitude of his platform, I feel I need to address this issue.
In a recent sermon over Acts 15, Andy made the statement that Christians need to “unhitch the Old Testament from their faith.” To be clear, Andy did not say we need to throw out the OT or that it is completely irrelevant or anything of the sort. In fact, he acknowledged that the OT is the divinely inspired Word of God. That said, in (what I believe to be) stark contrast to those assertions and beliefs, he then proposed some other ideas & thoughts that seem to be in direct conflict. Here are a few of them:
"Peter, James, and Paul elected to unhitch the Christian faith from their Jewish scriptures, and my friends, we must as well.”
“First Century church leaders unhitched the church from the worldview, value system, and regulations of the Jewish scriptures.”
This is only a small sample.
What I believe Andy is attempting to do and to communicate is that many of the First Century Jewish Christians were making it incredibly hard for the Gentiles to come to faith because they were continuing to impose many of the regulations of the Old Covenant on these Christians. Whether it be circumcision, celebration or observance of certain festivals and offerings, or even some of the Pharisaical laws that were added to the Old Covenant by the Pharisees, there were unnecessary stumbling blocks being placed in many of the Gentiles way of coming to Christ.
Paul constantly refuted this. He rebuked Peter for it. It diminished the power and necessity for the atoning work of Christ. This is why the Jerusalem Council was held in Acts 15. Which brings me back to Andy’s sermon. A sermon on Acts 15.
Leading into the sermon, there was an appeal made to anyone who has “lost faith, is leaving the faith, or who has already left their faith” and almost an apology along with it for the possibility that the Old Testament - or the preaching of it - was the catalyst behind their departure from their faith or the church. So to be clear, the starting ground and launch point for this sermon was that there are those out there for whom the Old Testament - the divinely inspired Word of God - has become a stumbling block for them to follow Jesus. The meat and message of this “sermon” is that it is solely the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead that brings us salvation and that we should care to share with those who don’t know Christ. For full disclosure, here is the sermon in it’s entirety if you’d like to watch it:
Allow me, if you will, the opportunity to share why the message this sermon is sending is off target and point out some of the dangerous ideas - even ignorance and hypocrisy - that I believe it communicates.
First off, the fact that many First Century Jewish Christians were legalistically still clinging to much of the Law rather than embracing the atoning work of Christ, does not in any way justify that we - 21st Century Christians - need to negate the message, power, effectiveness and fulfillment of the Old Testament (or Old Covenant) in and through Christ. To be quite honest, I know countless more Christians today that lean toward antinomianism (recklessly abusing the grace of God) than toward legalism. I have a feeling the makeup of the people in Andy’s church is quite similar. I’m not saying that there are countless heathens in our churches, but that if the majority leans one way or the other, it’s toward the abuse of grace and not the practice of a legalistic, black and white adherence to the law.
If Andy had actually preached an expository sermon on Acts 15, everyone there that morning would know that Paul actually used the Old Testament (Amos 9) to communicate the prophesied call of God to save the Gentiles, and as a result, the necessity of the Jews not to impress unnecessary demands on them. This was a perfect opportunity not to “unhitch” from the Old Testament, but to actually preach it and make the point. But this is one more example of coming up with what you (we) think needs to be preached and going into the scriptures to make our point rather than allowing the scriptures to make their own point and us (as preachers) calling attention to it. This is expository preaching.
The irony that this sermon was actually preached from Acts 15 is (in my opinion) quite deep.
Let’s go a bit further.
Andy constantly makes the point that, during the First Century, the people didn’t have the scriptures. Of course they didn’t have the New Testament yet; they were living it out. Paul hadn’t written or sent his letters yet. The Gospels were penned during these days. But they most certainly had the Old Testament. They had the Prophets. They knew the Psalms. They chanted and sang the Songs of Ascent (Psalm 121-150) on their way to the Temple. They recited the Proverbs. They told their children and their children’s children the story of the Exodus. When you have a right understanding of the Old Testament - that from creation to the Garden, to the Flood, to the Exodus, and to the Kings and through the Prophets it was all pointing to Jesus - you understand how powerfully the Old Testament came to life for the First Century church.
The entire book of Romans is catalyzed by Habakkuk 2:4, “The righteous shall live by faith.”
The entire book of Hebrews is a celebration of the fulfillment of the Old Covenant in Christ.
Let’s go back to the resurrection.
After Jesus rose from the dead, 2 of his followers left Jerusalem and went back to Emmaus. Jesus appeared to them on the road, but they were kept from recognizing him. They began (in deep despair) explaining to Jesus what had happened: that Jesus (yes, himself) had been crucified. And (my paraphrase) "we thought he was the Messiah, but obviously not. And some of his really crazy followers are claiming he rose from the dead. But we haven’t seen him. We won’t believe that until we see.” At that point, what does Jesus do? I’ll let Luke tell you:
“Beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.” Luke 24:27
When Peter stood up at Pentecost, under the power and outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and began to preach the gospel, what did he do? He begins quoting Joel (the prophet) and David (the king) - the Old Testament. And Peter points out that David “foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of Christ…” Part of the power of the resurrection of Christ is that God - through the OT prophets - had continually for years and years and generation after generation revealed, prophesied, and foretold that that was exactly what He was going to do.
Friends, the last thing on earth we ought to do is “unhitch from the Old Testament”! It is the glorious revelation of the rebellion of man, the insufficiency of our own efforts to ever be able to make it right, the simultaneous mercy of God to constantly pursue, restore, and save His people, and the ultimate plan (from the very beginning) to redeem them (us) and reconcile them (us) back to Himself through the life, death, and resurrection of His Son.
The Old Testament is all about Jesus!
You don't want to unhitch from Jesus!
If the Old Testament is a stumbling block for someone to come to Jesus, it's because it's not be rightly preached or understood or both. It all points to Jesus.
Andy Stanley is possibly one of the best communicators out there. I believe he loves the Lord with all his heart and soul. I am praying that he will begin to see that the Old Testament is not a stumbling block, but a building block, to reveal the eternal truth of the redemption of mankind through Jesus Christ. His life, death, and resurrection.
No comments:
Post a Comment