In an interview with Russell Moore, Pastor Andy Stanley
encouraged Christian leaders to take their focus off the
Bible and put it on the resurrection in order to reach
a skeptical world. But we don’t need to abandon our
defense of the Scripture to emphasize the resurrection.
When you hear the word gospel, what image pops into your mind?
For many, perhaps most believers, it’s the cross. And that’s
not surprising, given the emphasis in many evangelical
churches today. How often have you heard a sermon about
the “good news,” and come away with vivid images of
Christ’s suffering and humiliating death on the cross?
But something’s missing. The resurrection!
In many minds, the resurrection is a footnote to the
crucifixion. Yet the resurrection stands at the heart of
the Christian faith and was front and center in the early
church’s messages. The crucifixion and resurrection are
like two sides of a coin. One without the other is incomplete
and ineffective. The early church took every opportunity to
tell people about their risen Lord, who not only died for us
but also conquered death.
“And though they found no cause for death in Him, they
” (Acts 13:28–30).
asked Pilate that He should be put to death. Now when they
had fulfilled all that was written concerning Him, they took
Him down from the tree and laid Him in a tomb. But God
raised Him from the dead
In his first message recorded in Acts, the Apostle Paul
focused his attention on the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The remaining verses of his sermon highlight Old Testament
prophecies that the Messiah would not remain in the
grave. That’s what the apostles wanted the world to hear.
When someone points this out to the average Christian,
they are quick to admit that, yes, of course the apostles
emphasized the gospel everywhere they went (see below).
So why would anyone object when a modern church leader
calls on the church to get its focus back on the resurrection?
A Risen Savior—An Essential Part of the Gospel
Wherever he traveled, Paul preached about the risen Lord, even among Greek
audiences who viewed the concept of a physical resurrection as absurd
(Acts 17:18, 32). He repeatedly wrote about the fact that Jesus had risen from the dead.
At times, it seems that Paul could not finish a thought without mentioning that
Jesus had conquered death (Galatians 1:1; 1 Thessalonians 1:10).
Every sermon delivered by an apostle in the book of Acts centered on the
resurrection. Peter opened his first letter by stating that God the Father “has
begotten us to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the
dead” (1 Peter 1:3).
The apostles’ strong emphasis on the Easter event demonstrates sound theology.
If Christ has not risen, then our faith is futile and we are still in our sins
(1 Corinthians 15:17–18). Yet, because Christ has risen, believers can be comforted
that we will see our believing loved ones again (1 Thessalonians 4:14–18). Our
bodies will one day be transformed into incorruptible and immortal bodies, and
we will dwell with Him eternally (1 Corinthians 15:54;
Revelation 21:3–4). Death
will finally die (1 Corinthians 15:26).
Stressing the resurrection models the Lord’s own practice. Jesus was asked
what sign He would show to demonstrate His authority, and He replied by
prophesying that He would rise from the dead: “Destroy this temple, and in three
days I will raise it up” (John 2:19). Later, when the scribes and Pharisees asked for
a sign, Jesus pointed to His coming resurrection as the only sign He would give
(Matthew 12:39–40). In Revelation, the Lord twice identified Himself as the one
who was dead, but was now alive forevermore (Revelation 1:18, 2:8).
Finally, the apostles’ dedication to the resurrection makes perfect sense in light
of their circumstances. Following Christ’s crucifixion, the disciples wallowed in
despair. Fearing the authorities and ashamed that they had pinned all their hopes
on a man condemned to die on a cross, the disciples (sans John) abandoned their
Master. Everything changed when they met the risen Savior. Unbelief vanished
in undeniable sight. Timidity changed to unquenchable boldness. Empowered by
the Holy Spirit and inspired by the truth that their Savior had risen, the disciples
tirelessly preached the gospel in the face of persecution and death.
Out of Balance?
“I would ask
preachers and
pastors . . . to get
the spotlight off the
Bible and back on
the resurrection.”
—Andy Stanley,
Pastor of North Point Community Church
Recently, a well-known pastor, Andy Stanley, raised quite
a stir among Bible-believing Christians when he stated that
Christians need to emphasize the resurrection again. It was
not necessarily highlighting this event that caused the controversy.
Instead, during an interview with Russell Moore,
Stanley encouraged his listeners to simultaneously take
their focus off the Bible.
“I would ask preachers and pastors and student pastors in
their communications to get the spotlight off the Bible and
back on the resurrection.”1
This provocative statement sparked responses from many
conservative Christians who pointed out some potentially
troublesome implications of Stanley’s words. Since the days
of the Reformation the concept of Sola Scriptura (the Bible
alone) has been a cornerstone of conservative Christian
belief. That is, the 66 books of the Bible are the only infallible
and sufficient rule for matters of faith and practice. If
that is the case, then why did Stanley seem to deemphasize
Scripture?
Pastor Stanley hastened to explain that this statement
had more to do with a practical approach to preaching to
a secular culture than with his own personal beliefs about
the Bible. He recommended that Christians “leverage the
authority we have in the resurrection as opposed to
Scripture—not because I don’t believe Scripture is inspired—in
terms of reaching this culture.” Stanley affirmed his own
belief in the inspiration of the Bible and elaborated on the
rationale behind his approach.
“When you’re dealing with secular people, as soon as you
say ‘the Bible,’ everybody now knows all the problems with
the Bible. And when I say problems, the problems in terms of
the culture’s view of the Bible, in terms of six-day creation,
no geological evidence for a worldwide Flood, and there’s no
evidence for the Exodus. . . . And when they, in their minds,
can discredit parts, it discredits the whole. . . . But the foundation
of our faith isn’t the Bible; the foundation of our faith
is an event—the resurrection.”
Stanley accurately describes the reactions of many people
to the Bible’s record that the earth is only a few thousand
years old and was destroyed by a global Flood. He is also
correct in pointing out that the resurrection (along with the
crucifixion) is the foundation of the Christian faith. However,
the attempt to shift the focus away from Scripture, even
for strategic purposes, has had disastrous results in the past.
Theological liberalism arose in the nineteenth century, for
example, largely because leaders in the church were embarrassed
by the early passages in Genesis that seemed to contradict
the claims of modern geology that the earth’s layers
formed slowly over millions of years. They shifted their
focus away from the Bible’s history to emphasize its moral
and spiritual teaching in an effort to keep Christianity relevant
in an academic culture that had recently rejected the
history recorded in the Bible.
Admittedly, Stanley did not deny the truths of Scripture,
but his approach tends to separate the historical facts of the
resurrection recorded in the four Gospels from the historical
facts found in the rest of Scripture. How can you ask people to
believe some of the Bible’s revealed history and not the rest?
“For the first 300 years, the debate centered on an event,
not a book. The question was not . . . is the Bible true? The
question was, Did Jesus rise from the dead? . . . Matthew said,
‘Oh yes, He did,’ and Mark said, ‘Oh yes, He did,’ and Luke
said, ‘Oh yes, He did,’ and John said, ‘Oh yes, He did,’ and
Peter said, ‘Oh yes, He did,’ and James the brother of Jesus
said, “Oh yes, He did.’”2
These statements are largely accurate, although there were
other critical debates about the Trinity and Christ’s deity, too.
For the most part, the early discussions did not center on
the scientific and historical accuracy of the Old Testament,
as they often do today. Yet one thing remains in common:
the primary reason we believe these events are true is their
record in the Bible.
Stanley suggests that in our efforts to reach a postmodern
and secular culture, we should set aside these controversial
aspects of Christian belief and focus
on the events surrounding the crucifixion
and resurrection as described
by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter,
James, and Paul. After all, it is easier
to defend a smaller section of Scripture
written by eyewitnesses and their
contemporaries than it is to defend the
entirety of the Bible. This strategy may
appeal to some pastors and others who
specialize in disciplines other than
apologetics, but what are the dangers?
Either/Or?
Perhaps the greatest danger with
this approach is the perceived inconsistency
of trusting and emphasizing
one part of Scripture while avoiding
other parts of the Bible that happen
to be unpopular today. An apologist’s
defense of the Christian faith need not
be limited to an “either/or” approach
(focus on one part or the whole); we can
hold to a “both/and” strategy. Why not
strive to counter attacks on every part
of Scripture, including those that are
launched against the historical and scientific
accuracy of the Old Testament?
As mentioned earlier, the Apostle
Paul stressed the resurrection repeatedly,
yet he also told the Ephesian
elders that he had not failed to teach
them “the whole counsel of God”
(Acts 20:27). Surely, this counsel included
powerful instruction in the Scriptures,
even those Old Testament passages
that may have seemed quite strange to
a predominantly Gentile church.
At the same time, apologists must be
careful not to become so engrossed in
the defense of the entirety of Scripture that they neglect to
share the gospel—the heart of Christianity. Paul stated that
the gospel “is the power of God to salvation for everyone
who believes” (Romans 1:16). What have we accomplished
if we convince people about the truth of the Bible’s creation
account but fail to introduce them to the Creator, the Lord
Jesus Christ, who died and rose again?
The crucifixion and
resurrection of Christ
must be foremost in our
efforts, but we should
also do our best to
answer questions about
the Bible to remove the
stumbling blocks.
Ultimately, our goal must be to clearly present the gospel.
Apologetic arguments can help in removing stumbling blocks
to the faith, but the Holy Spirit is the only one who can bring
about the conviction in a sinner’s heart that leads to faith.
This process of humans working with God has been compared
to Christ’s raising of Lazarus in John 11. Jesus instructed
some people to move the stone covering the tomb of Lazarus,
but the Lord is the one who did the supernatural work of
raising Lazarus from the dead. We can make every effort to
remove the stones that block a person’s view of the Savior,
but God is the only one who renews a person’s heart.
The Savior’s View of Scripture
We do not possess exhaustive records of everything Jesus
did or said (John 21:25), but the four Gospels provide enough
detail for us to know that He acknowledged the accuracy and
historicity of the Old Testament. He often referred His listeners
back to Scripture, because He knew that Scripture carried
divine authority. This is true even of the Bible’s earliest chapters
that are often disputed today. Jesus spoke of the creation
of the first man and woman (Matthew 19:4–5), of Abel
(Matthew 23:35), and of Noah and the Flood
(Matthew 24:37–39).
The Lord’s view of Scripture did not waver after He rose
from the dead. In His discussion with two disciples on
the road to Emmaus, He reassured them that the Messiah
needed to suffer and die by showing them passages from the
Old Testament that prophesied these facts (see Daniel 9:26
and Isaiah 53).
Christians who believe that the Old Testament contains
scientific and historical errors might point out that Jesus
never directly addressed many of the challenges to belief facing modern Christians. It is true that we don’t have any
record of Jesus speaking against geological uniformitarianism
(slow formation of rock layers over millions of years),
Darwinian evolution, and other secular views of history.
However, the Lord set the pattern of treating Genesis as literal
history, and the whole New Testament makes clear that
Christ’s central purpose in coming to earth is grounded in
the realities explained in the Bible’s first few chapters.
Consider 1 Corinthians 15:45, where Christ is called the
last Adam. The reason the Son of God’s physical death and
subsequent physical resurrection solves humanity’s sin
problem is founded in Genesis 1–3. The sin of the first man,
Adam, brought death into this world. If Adam was not a real
person and his sin did not actually bring physical death into
God’s creation, then why did Jesus need to die on the cross
and rise from the dead? Genesis must be a true record of our
origins, and Adam’s fall must be a reality, not merely myth,
allegory, or fable, for Christ’s sacrificial death to make sense.
Yes, as Andy Stanley implied, we can avoid getting into
Genesis when we try to help people realize that they are
guilty of sinning against God, but if we are unwilling to take
our listeners back to the beginning, how do we explain why
death is the punishment for that sin?
On the one hand, it is encouraging to see Stanley emphasize
the historicity of the resurrection, particularly in light
of the way the modern church has neglected this vital event.
However, some pastors avoid unpopular biblical accounts in
Genesis that many people readily dismiss, and some pastors
even undermine these accounts by dismissing their historicity.
These actions neglect foundational elements of the
Christian faith that make the gospel a coherent message.
Let us practice a “both/and” approach to the way we share
our faith with an unbelieving world, trusting God that
His Word truly is “living and powerful,” and can convince
hearts in every matter it speaks on
(Hebrews 4:12). The crucifixion
and resurrection of Christ must be foremost in our
efforts, but we should also do our best to answer questions
about the Bible to remove the stumbling blocks that may be
preventing people from understanding and receiving the
soul-saving gospel.
holds a master of divinity degree,
specializing in apologetics and theology and a
ThM in church history and theology from Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary. He is content
manager for Answers in Genesis’ Ark Encounter theme park and author of In Defense of Easter.
SourceThis article originally appeared on answersingenesis.org
Views: 4
Discover more from Emmanuel Baptist Church
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.