I Ended Up Dropping Charles and Andy Stanley From My List Because They're Out of Touch

-
I was reading through Pulpit & Pen some time ago and I realized one thing - both Charles and Andy Stanley are out of touch. While I don't want to deny that Charles had written a good devotional called "In His Presence" but there's one book called "Eternal Security" which ends up providing false assurances for false converts. Here's some quotes from his book that I consider to be really heretical:
  • “Even if a believer for all practical purposes becomes an unbeliever, his salvation is not in jeopardy” (Chapter 10, p. 93).
  • “And last, believers who lose or abandon their faith will retain their salvation, for God remains faithful” (p. 94)

The problem of Charles' book is that he denies the one essential truth that CANNOT be separated from eternal security. This truth is called the Perseverance of the Saints. It reminds me of a theological argument gone bad with an Easy Baptist. He continued to insist in these same points that you can have eternal security without the perseverance of the saints as a result of it. That teaching is nowhere in the Scriptures. The difference between Charles and Arthur W. Pink is this - Pink's book called Eternal Security warned about the dangers of Antinomianism. Dr. John F. MacArthur's emphasis of eternal security in the book "The Gospel According to Jesus" emphasized the important truth that Dr. Harry A. Ironside also warned about Matthew 24:13 and 1 John 2:19. They warn that those who claim to be once saved, always saved but end up departing or not enduring are in fact, false converts.

Now, I could talk about the headaches I've had with Andy himself. He even dares to trash expository preaching where he calls it "cheap" and "lazy". Pulpit & Pen also reveal that he has also gone as far as to say that unity is more important than to be theological correct. That kind of statement alone makes me go as far as to say, "Isn't it any wonder why so many attend his megachurch?" Matthew 7:13-14 warn how often the majority is wrong and that the gate to destruction is indeed very wide and the way to life is indeed very narrow. 

This has me thinking of the dangers of a no-lordship, easy believism salvation. Some may think that they are "easy believists" but they actually believe in Lordship salvation. I remembered the time I thought of myself as an opponent of Lordship salvation - thinking it was merely another synonym for works salvation until I did further research with Reformed Theology. I refuse to believe that you can be once saved, always saved and never result to a change in life or enduring to the end - that verified my stand that I was into Lordship salvation. Then what may have confirmed my status in Lordship salvation is that I believe if your Jesus isn't Lord then you're not saved at all. 

Again, I need to emphasize what Lordship salvation really means. It's not about adding faith plus works. Rather, it emphasizes the Scriptural truth that the eternal salvation can't be lost are characterized by a lifestyle that's struggling with sin, wants to be free from sin, wants to serve Christ, progressive sanctification and good works. It believes that true faith will result to good works (Ephesians 2:8-10, Titus 2:11-14, James 2:14-23) and that any faith that will not result to good works should be dismissed as a dead faith. 

See also: