This is part 2 of my review of Stanley’s “Aftermath” sermon series. Andy plays “Scripture Alone” off “stand alone” to try to establish that the first “Christians” didn’t even have a Bible (a claim he makes), but instead focused solely on Jesus’ resurrection. This resurrection makes Christianity unassailable, where an “absolutely true book” makes Christianity a “house of cards.”
Short answer: a covenantal understanding of word and event is the remedy to Stanley’s errors.
This is part 1 of my interaction with Andy Stanley’s “Aftermath” sermon series. In short, Andy believes we need to “unhitch” Christianity from the Old Testament that it might not be difficult for people to convert.
Out position, however, is that you can’t have the fruit of Jesus without the root of the “Old Testament.”
Assuming I did this correctly, here’s my approach to addressing the “what about shellfish?” Objection to the Christian faith. The short answer: it’s the unbeliever that cherrypicks the texts in their objection rather than taking the time to understand what we believe. With that said, yes, Christians are often guilty in their objections to others.