About the author

Andy Stanley is the son of Charley Stanley.  Andy Stanley graduated from Dallas Theological Seminary and now pastors at North Point Community Church in Atlanta, GA.

 

This book is written to unbelievers as a challenge to consider the claims of Christianity.  It is sold in paperback version so as to be inexpensive enough to be handed out liberally as “tracts.”

 

Quick assessment

Let me be frank about the book.  It is very inadequate as a presentation of the gospel.  Because certain truths of the gospel are downplayed, it can even be misleading.

 

Stanley aims to challenge the common theory that good people go to heaven.  It certainly is a common misguided belief. 

 

The all-too-common logic

Stanley says Jesus taught something that was a lot different than people expect.  Jesus told man “bad” people that would go to heaven, and He told many “good” people they would not.  Next, Stanley tries to logically show how Jesus’ claims must be accepted.  Stanley asks the reader, “Who do you think Jesus was?”  He says there are four possibilities: (1) Jesus was lying about himself.  Stanley says no one thinks this – or, at least he hasn’t run into anyone who thinks Jesus was anything but “good.”  Also, no one would knowingly die for a lie.  (2) Jesus was crazy.  Stanley says this can’t be because people followed Him after He died. (3) Jesus never claimed to be the Son of God – that stuff was added to the record about Jesus.  Stanley says this can’t be because no one would have been motivated to do this.  Also, someone added something to the record about Jesus; he added the hard to believe stuff to the stuff that was believable.  The last reason Stanley suggests for rejecting this is that the four accounts of Jesus (the Gospels) were disseminated among people that were eyewitnesses to these things and therefore would have known better. (4) Jesus is Who He said He is. 

 

Is this the proper method of evangelism?

This logic has been used by many others.  I would never bring up this logic to anyone to convince him that the gospel is true for a few reasons:

 

1. The logic seems good, but we might be forgetting something.  Perhaps there is a fifth possibility.  We may try to reason correctly, but because we are human, we may mess up. 

 

2. It is not part of the gospel message.  If someone says it is totally unreasonable to believe what the gospel says, I may suggest this system of logic, but I would explain to them that it will not convince them to believe.

 

3. When the logic is offered without confronting a person’s “God has to prove Himself to me before I will believe Him” attitude, it communicates something which is contrary to the gospel.  The gospel “commands men everywhere to repent” (Acts 17).  It does not suggest that a man should consider repenting if it seems reasonable to him.

 

4. When the logic is offered without confronting a person’s “God has to prove Himself to me before I will believe Him” attitude, it presupposes the man has the ability to reason to the truth without first fearing the Lord.  Proverbs 1:7 says, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge.”

 

A man-centered gospel versus a God-centered gospel

Stanley’s presentation of the gospel exalts man above God in the following ways:

 

1. Stanley does not emphasize the gospel truth that all men are sin sick and totally helpless before God to please Him. He does mention this truth, but plays it down. 

 

On page 13 Stanley says, “You see, as good as you are – and you are pretty good – you aren’t really sure if you have been good enough.”

 

Who does Stanley think is “pretty good?”  Romans 3:10-18 says that no one does good. 

 

On page 46 Stanley says, “Or what if God’s holiness and perfection outweigh his mercy and he requires that 90 percent of our deeds be good?  Or what if God grades on a curve and Mother Teresa skewed the cosmic curve, raising the bar for good deeds beyond what most of us are capable of?  Granted, heaven would be sparsely populated, but who knows?  When she was around, Mother Teresa was constantly calling men and women out of their comfort zones to follow in her commitment to love the poor and downtrodden.  Maybe God was speaking to us through her.  Maybe she knew something most of us have missed.  Again, we don’t know.”

 

Yes, we do know.  Because God is holy, He demands perfection.  No one is perfect.  All men are totally depraved.  God gives perfect righteousness to a man when He saves the man.  It is the imputed righteousness of Christ (2 Cor. 5:21).  Mother Teresa was not “good.”  She thought she was.  She tried to be.  All she had was her own “filthy rags” as she stood before God.  Only the perfect righteousness of Christ would have satisfied God’s righteous requirements.  Mother Teresa did not know something we don’t.  She rejected the gospel in exchange for the false gospel of the Catholic Church.

 

2.  Stanley does not emphasize that God is the Creator and the righteous Judge over all men.

 

On page 41 Stanley says, “In Exodus 21:17, just a few verses removed from God’s Top Ten, it says, “Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.”  A bit extreme for my taste.”

 

Stanley thinks this is extreme?!!  What does his “taste” or anyone’s taste have to do with it anyway?!!  If we truly understand the God’s righteousness, we would not think that physical death is “extreme” as punishment for even the “smallest” sin.  God is HOLY!!!  This is the message of the Gospel!

 

3.  Stanley does not talk about how men were created to live for God.  Men exist for God’s pleasure.  They are obligated to live every moment for their Creator.  Anything less than that is sin.

 

On page 72 Stanley says, “Now if you are offended at being accused of offending God, that’s understandable.  After all, you are not a bad person and you probably can’t think of anything you have done to intentionally offend God.”

 

All men are “bad people.”  Stanley should explain to them their obligation to serve God with their whole lives because they owe everything to God.  He should explain that living for self is rebellion against God since he was created to live for God’s pleasure.

 

4. Stanley does not emphasize man’s required response to Christ and His gospel. 

 

On page 49 Stanley says, “Perhaps the most emotionally perplexing problem with the good people go to heaven view is that it contradicts the teachings of Jesus Christ.”

 

Stanley makes it sound as though repentance and faith are optional – the gospel is one of many views.  It isn’t one of many.  It is not optional.  God commands men to repent. 

 

On page 63 Stanley says, “Yes, there is an alternative to the good people go view.  This is the view I hold, along with almost one-third of the world’s population.”

 

Are there that many people who “hold this view?”  I don’t think so. 

 

5. Stanley does not emphasize that men must submit to Christ as their Master in order to be saved.

 

On page 91 Stanley says, “Believing in him is the only requirement.  Believing means placing one’s trust in the fact that Jesus is who he claimed to be and that his death accomplished what he claimed it accomplished.”

 

Some may say that Jesus claimed to be Master, and that is what people must believe.  This is true, but we, as Christ’s ambassadors, must make this clear.  This is not a truth people assume.  People naturally look for the easy way out.  It is a common notion that a person can accept Christ as Savior without accepting Him as Lord.  To be a faithful ambassador, you must make this truth clear. 

 

Conclusion

I think Stanley knows the gospel better than he explains it in this little book. 

 

As we explain the gospel we should remember (1) It is God’s gospel to be presented in the way He wants it to be explained; (2) Our ultimate goal in sharing the gospel must be to glorify God (rather than to save men); and (3) We must always set apart Christ as Lord/Master in our hearts as we share the gospel (1 Peter 3:15).

 

Good presentations of the gospel include Seeking God by Peter Jeffrey, Right with God by Peter Jeffrey and Ultimate Questions by John Blanchard.