Andy Stanley’s Soft Landing on Homosexuality?

Say it isn’t so, Joe (or, in this case, Andy)! Did my ears hear what I think they heard? Surely not. Was my mind playing tricks on me? It’s happened before, so I wouldn’t discount it. No way that Andy Stanley — one of Evangelical Christianity’s best communicators — would say something that could be misconstrued as condoning homosexuality. But, that’s exactly what my Student Pastor and I heard after listening to Part 5 of Stanley’s sermon series, “Christian: When Gracie Met Truthy.”(h/t to Peter Lumpkins’ post, “Mark Driscoll, Liberty University, Mitt Romney, Richard Land, Lifeway, Andy Stanley: a bit of potpourri”).

I suppose both of us could have simply misunderstood what Andy Stanley was trying to communicate through one of his sermon illustrations. Believe me. As one who has benefited from reading “Communicating for Change” and “Seven Practices of Effective Ministry,” I have come to appreciate Stanley’s ministerial philosophy, even if I don’t always agree with some of his methodology (multi-site church being the prime example). Even though Andy, the son of longtime Southern Baptist pastor Charles Stanley, no longer considers himself a Southern Baptist, I have never had occasion to question his theological convictions. After watching the aforementioned sermon, I can no longer say that.

Before I address the serious issue I have with Stanley’s sermon, I want to point out some of the more helpful aspects of his message. Using John 1:14 as his main text, Stanley clearly communicated the apparent tension between the Biblical concepts of grace and truth, a tension which Stanley believes is still a reality in our modern world (including within the Church). This tension can be seen in the person of Jesus Christ, who the Apostle John describes as being “full of grace and truth.” I agree with Stanley’s observations. In fact, most conservative Evangelicals would agree with the broad principle that Andy Stanley communicated in “When Gracie Met Truthie,” namely that holding both grace and truth in a balanced tension can sometimes lead to messy results.

However, it is when one begins to translate Stanley’s words into practice that one gets the sense that truth (or the moral law) must somehow take a secondary position to grace, at least in one major area. If you guessed that major area is homosexuality, then you would be a much better guesser than yours truly. Color me completely perplexed, dumbfounded, and otherwise confused by Andy Stanley’s one and only sermon illustration for how North Point manages the tension between grace and truth. If I’m understanding his illustration correctly (which I hope that I am not), then where Andy Stanley and his church land on this issue (his words) is soft. Soft, when it comes to the truth of sin, is not good. And, it’s not grace.

Those of you who have read my blog for any length of time will understand that I am a big fan of God’s grace — His unmerited favor toward sinners. The title of my blog, “From Law to Grace,” reflects my personal experience as a sinner (no, not just because I was a lawyer) who was transformed by God’s grace and who, because of that amazing grace, was transferred from practicing law to preaching grace. However, God’s grace has not abolished the Moral Law (or Truth) of God’s commandments, including His commandments dealing with sexual sin. Therefore, we are not at liberty to downplay or discount that which the Bible clearly labels as sin. And, based upon Andy Stanley’s detailed (including graphics) illustration, I am confused at best as to what he believes about homosexuality within the church, one of three areas he said his church struggles with the tension between grace and truth.

In illustrating one of these areas, he shared the story of a couple in his church who went through a painful divorce 5 1/2 years ago. This particular divorce involved adultery by the husband. However, it was not just any adultery, but adultery with another man. This (among other reasons to be sure) precipitated the divorce. After some time away, the ex-husband and his male partner started attending North Point, but the ex-wife was still mad at the whole situation (you don’t say) and did not want her ex-husband and his gay lover attending the same church as she and her daughter. In so many words, she told them to find another church in Atlanta to attend.

As the story goes, the gay couple started attending the Buckhead campus, which was closer to their home. Their first Sunday at the satellite campus of North Point was “Strategic Service Sunday,” wherein the church recruited people to volunteer to serve. Responding to this vision to serve in ministry, the couple — who were living an open, homosexual lifestyle — signed up to be on the “Host Team,” one of North Point’s Guest Services’ Teams. Do you think that it would be a problem for an openly gay couple to serve on a Host Team for a church? If you answered yes, then you are correct. If you think you know WHAT the problem is that would prevent an openly gay couple from serving on one of North Point’s Guest Services’ Teams, then you are probably as dead wrong as I was.

You see, according to Andy Stanley’s high-tech, graphically supported illustration — which was obviously well-rehearsed and not some off-the-cuff, half-baked story — the problem with the gay couple serving was not that they were in an open, homosexual relationship that had already destroyed one marriage and family and was about to destroy another one. Nope. The problem was that the partner of the ex-husband was still married to his wife and, according to Stanley — and his illustration — he was therefore committing adultery which precluded him from serving. If he would only get divorced, then he could serve because he would no longer be in an adulterous relationship. He would still be in a homosexual relationship, but that apparently was fine and dandy as far as the Buckhead pastor and Andy Stanley were concerned.

After I picked my jaw up from the floor, I had to re-watch what Andy Stanley had just said to make sure that I was not missing something. I really wish I could say that I was making this up, but I am sad to say that I am not. I would encourage you to watch the message for yourself (click here and then click on Part 5 of the sermon series — the illustration starts at about the 24:27 mark) and draw your own conclusions.

I fully understand that there will always be a tension between grace and truth. However, we are commanded in Scripture to speak the truth in love and to make sure “our speech is always gracious, seasoned with salt (i.e., the truth), so that we may know how we ought to answer each person.” After watching this message, I am confused as to how Andy Stanley would answer someone who is struggling with the sin of homosexuality. Stanley is a master communicator and I can’t help but think that his illustration was designed to communicate a particular belief about how the Church should apply grace and truth as it relates to the issue of homosexuality (although he went to great lengths to avoid mentioning homosexuality at all in his illustration). Jesus is full of “grace and truth.” When the issues are blurry, we can afford to err on the side of grace. When the issues are clear — and homosexuality is one of those issues — then we cannot afford to sacrifice truth for grace. If we do, the landing will be anything but soft!

83 comments for “Andy Stanley’s Soft Landing on Homosexuality?

  1. North Point Member
    April 26, 2012 at 8:35 AM

    I think that you, in fact, did not understand Andy’s message. We are all sinners and need grace. Jesus instructed us to love everyone, including other sinners.

    If NPCC, or any other church, began turning away homosexuals, then, in order to be consistent, the church would need to turn away anyone guilty of sexual (or any other) sin, and you would end up in an empty church.

    Should the church say that any unmarried heterosexual couple living in sin cannot volunteer to serve? What about someone who “openly” overeats and generally does not take care of the Lord’s temple (think Big Mac, super size fries and a chocolate shake). Do you also throw out everyone who experiences road rage? How about we conduct a financial audit to kick out everyone who doesn’t tithe or who has “fudged” on their taxes (you don’t really expect me to count proceeds from my yard sale as taxable income do you?). Can we get rid of any smokers? I mean, not only does it clearly pollute God’s temple, but it’s also annoying to us non-smokers!

    People find it easiest to resent sins they cannot relate to or that they distaste. We are most offended by the sins that don’t personally haunt us.

    I’m straight. I have a difficult time understanding, relating to, or even thinking too much about two guys together (although two girls somehow does not seem quite as bad – see I just sinned right there!). So, it’s easy for me to talk about the abomination of homosexuality.

    Others, especially those without kids, and specifically those without MY kids, could probably call me out pretty well on my temper. How could anyone get so frustrated and angry with such beautiful children?! If you only knew just how angry I really felt toward them sometimes, you’d have me kicked out in a heartbeat.

    My point is this: sin is sin. That doesn’t excuse it. It’s ALL bad. We ALL do it. It ALL separates us from God.

    I don’t believe that Andy thinks ANY sexuality outside of marriage is okay. That includes homosexuality as well as good old fashion heterosexual lust. We at North Point also do not condone anger, greed, pride, sloth or jealousy. But, if we didn’t allow anyone guilty of those sins to volunteer on Sunday, we probably would not have any volunteers.

    • April 26, 2012 at 10:47 AM


      Thanks for taking the time to read and to comment this morning. I will be the first to admit (which I did in the post) that I may have misunderstood what Andy was trying to say. However, your comments and questions raise more questions from me. First, however, there is much to agree with in your comments. There’s no question that we are all sinners in need of God’s grace, love, forgiveness, and mercy. Jesus came to seek and to save those who were lost — and that’s all of us. I think we all find it easier to be offended by those sins which we don’t struggle with and try to make excuses for those sins with which we do struggle with. That’s part of our fallen human nature. I can certainly relate to being anry and frustrated with children as I have three boys (ages 12, 10, and 6) who are “all boy.”

      I don’t believe that any church should “turn away” sinners. In fact, that’s what the church is here for — we are a hospital for sinners and we never stop being patients. To answer your first question about the heterosexual couple living in sin, I would answer no, they could not serve (at least in the church I pastor). Same for the homosexual couple. As to your other examples, I think we have to look at whether these sins are known (i.e., public), unrepentant, and continuous. While “sin is sin” in God’s eyes, I’m not sure I would categorize smokers in the same category as homosexuals nor would lump those who don’t tithe into the same group as those heterosexual couples who live together without benefit of marriage. I obviiously draw the line differently than perhaps you would, but then again, your own pastor, Andy Stanley, also drew a line with his illustration. The line he drew was that the homosexual partner was still married to his wife and therefore committing the sin of adultery which precluded him from serving (that’s what Andy Stanley conveyed in his illustration). It was not the sin of homosexuality that precluded the two unmarried, gay men from serving at Buckhead. So, here’s the question for you that I hope would clear up any misunderstanding that I have about Andy’s message: Are openly gay couples or heterosexual couples known to be living together (I suppose there are those who could hide both of those circumstances) allowed to join as members of North Point and/or to serve at North Point? I’mm not talking about attending, which I would hope all churches would be open to having sinners — regardless of their sin — attending. I am simply talking about membership and/or serving within your church. Thanks in advance for your response and thanks for stopping by today. God bless,


    • Gordon
      April 27, 2012 at 10:30 AM

      We all know that Satan is the great deceiver, and boy has he had a field day with this one. Satan has taken a statement of truth, i.e., “…after all, we all sin,” and has blinded many believers by encouraging church people to use that as a reason to tolerate homosexual activity. When God labeled a specific sin as an abomination to Him, he was not talking about anger, smoking or Big Macs.

    • David
      April 27, 2012 at 2:05 PM

      I too am a member at Northpointe and you are way off base. If your point is right and we do not want to allieinate sinners, then why did Andy sit down with them and tell them that the man who was not yet divorced from his wife could not serve because he was committing adultery? I have listened to this message4 times and I have written Andy about it. My question is why does one sexual sin exclude from serving but another one does not? I have received a letter and a phone call from a director of family ministries but was told he could not speak for Andy and he could not answer my question. I called back to Andy’s office and left my question again but no one has responded.

      • Amanda M
        May 2, 2012 at 3:40 PM

        I think the argument this blogger is making – and that I agree with – is that ANY person living an openly, unrepentant, sinful lifestyle (not, like, people sin and we are all sinners and we all continually sin…rather people who have ONE sin that they think is fine but God doesn’t and they are non-repentant of that sin and plan to continue in that lifestyle). Un-repentant alcoholic? He needs treatment and help before I think it would be okay to serve. Consuming porn and don’t really care to change – help and change before you serve. And on and on…

    • KING
      May 4, 2012 at 7:22 AM

      If one of the homosexuals was still married to his wife – he stands a chance of ridding himself from the abominable sin he has been living in with his homosexual partner and being restored back to his wife completely.
      Whereas the other homosexual whose wife divorced him has simply lost his marriage and lost his life with it.
      On the other hand disallowing them to serve because one of them was still married to his wife implies that Andy recognizes the present homosexual relationship as a legitimate ‘marriage’ provided the one with the wife gets a divorce. Therefore, he seems to accept the divorce and remarriage drama irrespective of the sex of the persons involved.
      So, I see that Andy not only is condoning homosexuality per se but is ready to allow homosexual marriages and couples.

    • MJ
      June 15, 2012 at 7:56 AM

      Exactly. Thank you. Andy doesn’t think that homosexuality is God’s planned or best case for His people. He actually talks about the fact that NPCC is not fully supportive of the homosexual life style, like some churches may be, and he suggests that the reason most homosexuals appreciate the tension between CALLING SIN, SIN, AND LOVING OTHERS ANYWAY. Tim Keller said it well…it doesn’t seem to make sense that if being a heterosexual can’t get you into heaven, then being homosexual will not send you straight to hell. …there’s a tension there, because the church is actually at ts best when it embraces both grace and truth, and refuses to let go of either.

    • emc
      July 2, 2012 at 5:39 AM

      To the Northpoint Member:

      Salvation + baptism = membership. Church membership is based upon the two elements of salvation and baptism. The Church is not a social club. It is for the saved who follow the Lord in obedience. Baptism is obedience. Laying aside the sin of homosexuality is obedience. I can’t believe that I am actually writing these words. (Read and spiritually consume your Bible.)

      Unfortunately, there is now a majority of church-goers in America may never fully realize this truth until they stand before a righteous God whose love is not what their definition makes Him. When we define God by our own terms and don’t believe who He says He is, then even our salvation is in question.

      Let your anger be righteous anger; not the anger of a polluted culture that has filtered into the Church. It is neither righteous nor true.

    • paul terry
      August 10, 2012 at 4:49 PM

      Bravo! I was trying to come up with a response and you nailed it!
      and if there are any brave critics out there…. come visit the church and you will be suprised. Also watch part two
      of Shocking statements of Andy Stanley ( oh I mean shocking statements of Jesus) where Jesus says you can’t get a divorce (legally) (or without grace) and Andy actually says that marriage is between a man and a woman! Actually he said the Bible says that if it makes you feel better! That was before this ” Christian message” and gays still came back to church!

    • Mitch Tillman
      April 28, 2013 at 11:41 PM

      I Agree wholeheartedly. Good reply.

  2. volfan007
    April 26, 2012 at 9:32 AM

    North Point member,

    Let me get this straight. Are you saying that an openly homosexual person could…not only be a member in good standing of your church… but, also be a leader in your Church? An openly, unrepentant homosexual?


  3. Jess Page
    April 26, 2012 at 9:35 AM

    Excellent article. You can imagine what I’ve experienced in 42 yrs. of ministry. I could write quite a bit about your article and Andy’s interpretation but I won’t. I think I govern my relationship to other christians based on Dr. Jay Adams statement many years ago.
    “A thief dosen’t stop being a thief when he stops stealing. He stops being a thief when he stops stealing and goes to work. A lier dosen’t stop being a lier when he stops lieing. He stops being a lier when he stops lieing and starts telling the truth!”
    I require a new members class in order to become a member of our church. A couple came who had been living together for five years. I told them they could take the new members class but they couldn’t become members because they were living in open sin. At the end of the class I reminded them of what I had said. To make a long story short, she wasn’t willing and he was. He broke off that five year relationship because he saw the truth.
    I had a lesbian couple come to our church for help. I sat down and told them I didn’t approve of their lifestyle nor condone it and the Bible condemned it, but it had nothing to do with our helping them and loving them.We helped them and they continued to attend but never became members.
    There is a world of difference between being a christian through accepting Christ and being a christian and walking in the Spirit. If one dosen’t know bible doctrine (the Truth), there is absolutley nothing God can work with. A person can be a christian and still have a depraved mind. If they don’t read what Jesus did, they won’t have a clue of what Jesus would do.
    In regards to The Truth, in his book the “Saving Life of Christ”, Major Ian Thomas states, “The fundamental character of truth is its consistency” and in the face of every known and unknown fact, truth must remain inviolably (unalterable)constistent. It is final and absolute. Circumstances cannot change truth. If circumstances compel you to change your convictions, and honesty, in light of new information compels you to change your convictions, it does mean that you never knew the truth and that circumstances or additional information are compulling you to recognize the fact.”
    We live in the age of Relativism and Personalism. It might have been wrong for your generation but not wrong for ours. We’re all special in God’s eyes. He made us individuals the way we are. We should love ourselves because God loves us the way we are. The problem with that philosophy is we dimish personal responsibility for our sin before God and society. “…they esteem human wisdom greater than the revelation that God has given us by grace.” – David Legge.
    Jesus told us that only by knowing the truth, will we be free.

    • April 26, 2012 at 9:59 AM

      Bro. Jess,

      Thanks for the words of wisdom. Grace and Truth go hand-in-hand and the results, as Andy Stanley said, are sometimes messy. That’s a given. But, the results are even more mess and non-Biblical when we seem to be unwilling to speak the truth in love and call that which is clearly sin, sin. Your examples of the heterosexual couple and the lesbian couple are spot-on. That’s how we should approach these issues — with love/grace and the truth. But, sometimes the truth is both hard to give and even harder to receive. We’ve probably all dealt with both ends of that spectrum, particularly as pastors. But, when churches fail to speak clearly on what the Bible speaks clearl on, then we are indeed headed to relativism taking hold within the Church. Thanks for taking the time to read and to comment. Mom said you and Carol had stopped by when you were in town last week. I know she enjoyed the surprise visit. It’s good to hear from you. Hope things are well with you in AL. God bless,


    • Kristy Muller
      October 7, 2012 at 2:45 PM

      This is in reply to Jess Page: You say “There is a world of difference between being a christian through accepting Christ and being a christian and walking in the Spirit. If one dosen’t know bible doctrine (the Truth), there is absolutley nothing God can work with. A person can be a christian and still have a depraved mind. If they don’t read what Jesus did, they won’t have a clue of what Jesus would do.” So my question to you is, were all those people in the Bible useless because, guess what, we didn’t always have the full canon of the Bible. Also, if we are saved, we have the Holy Spirit, not a depraved mind. We may still battle the flesh like Paul spoke of, but the Holy Spirit will convict us. Also, Jesus IS THE TRUTH, so if we know HIM, WE DO KNOW BIBLE DOCTRINE. The Holy Spirit leads us in the TRUTH and to THE TRUTH.

  4. Lydia
    April 26, 2012 at 11:05 AM

    Howell, I hate to say this but it must be said. We have to STOP listening to and reading the talking heads and taking their teaching as solid without knowing them. Stanley has been very liberal on this and a whole lot of stuff for a long time. It just was not known outside certain circles. The mega’s I was in were constantly trying to emulate NP and marketing his books and materials so I had the occassion to check things out. I wrote him off over 7 years ago as shallow and a false teacher. In fact, after listening to sermon after sermon I had the average that scripture was mentioned at least once and it was a proof text for a topical sermons. Now, that was 8 years ago so things might have changed. And my freewheeling, cheap grace, sin more so grace will abound cousin has been going there for 10 years which makes me question it all the more. No conviction yet?

    Andy appeals to seekers. To keep the money flowing the mega’s have to be careful with the “truth” and concentrate more on grace which everyone likes. Unless, of course, you are disagreeing with the leaders. :o)

    • April 26, 2012 at 11:29 AM

      “To keep the money flowing the mega’s have to be careful with the “truth” and concentrate more on grace which everyone likes.”


      Do you think that many of the megas will purposefully shade the truth when it comes to some of these hot-button cultural/moral issues such as homosexuality, heterosexual cohabitation, and abortion so that do not run the risk of losing certain people and their money? I know that is a cynical take on things, but it seems to me that some churches, which operate more like a business than a church, would not want to jeopardize their revenue streams. In a church the size of North Point, would it cause more jeopardy to come down on the side of grace when dealing with these issues, thus offending those who believe that God’s Word is plain on sexual sin? Or, would it cause more jeopardy to come down on the side of truth when dealing with issues like homosexuality and cohabitation, thus offending those, like your cousin, who might stake out a more liberal position on these matters? It seems that your own experience working in the megas has given you a pretty clear answer to those questions. It is becoming harder and harder to surprise me about things happening in the SBC/Evangelical world, but I am still in somewhat of a state of shock over what I heard in Andy Stanley’s message. Perhaps the most disturbing thing — apart from appearing to condone the homosexual lifestyle — was how he (and the Buckhead pastor) addressed the gay partner’s marriage and divorce. The clear implication was that, if the partner would just divorce his wife, he would no longer be guilty of adultery and would therefore be eligible to serve, notwithstanding his homosexual relationship. That this message was communicated in such a clear way by one of Evangelicalism’s best communicators is amazing. I’m sure there will be more to this story in the days ahead. Thanks for your insight. Have a great day and God bless,


      • Lydia
        April 26, 2012 at 7:55 PM

        Howell, what are you going to do when your electric bill is 30 grand a month for ONE line item? I can remember going to a demographer at a university when we were studying trends for strategic planning for a church. The statistician was a gruff in your face type. He was poking at population trends and asking us who is going to buy all those McMansions surrounding the mega in 25 years? That was before the housing bubble and bailouts. (I cracked up when he said, you think the Somali immigrants are going to buy them?). Now, I am speaking generally so this won’t apply to every single mega church out there but the trends did not look good 10 years ago. They are worse now.

        The eventual solution became sat campuses in well heeled areas. But that is a bandaid. Here is what most folks don’t know. The average mega church has about 10% of consistent members who tithe. The real bulk of the money comes from passing the plate. So you have to have a full house in the seats (no pews, mind you) every service week after week.

        That is where I think doctrine comes in. You have to attract new people to “maintain” the system. It was a constant effort. There are as many going out the back door as coming in the front door. Those of us who are middle aged are a bit surprised at what we are seeing but we should not be. Look at what was done to attract our generation to grow them in the first place. A entire industry was born with Christian music, publishing, decor for the home, etc. It became a serious market niche that soon, everyone wanted in on.

        The mega’s have a bigger problem now because the generation they are trying to attract have totally different set of values than we did and ours weren’t great. That is one reason Driscoll is so popular among a certain segment of the young. (And, It is short walk from hetero sodomy to homosexuality because once you affirm sodomy the rest is just math. The camel is under the tent so to speak.And they will argue that is not true until they are blue in the face but they are not thinking outside Driscoll box)

        Look, there are huge buildings to maintain, large salaries to pay and no one involved wants to admit the whole thing was built on sand or cult of personality. I could write a book. Maybe I will but by the time it is finished I project certain mega churches will become Peddler Malls. But then again, there is always an exciting sermon series to market or new program to launch to be relevant so you never know. You get the kids and you get the parents. One thing I do know is that many of them (not all) are dead with tons of people in them. But not as many as their published numbers, Never believe the numbers.

        But I will stop with this. Go back to 50- 60 years ago. Who were the Christian celebrities, Perhaps your parents or grandparents had a room full of their books? Who were the in Christian music groups? How many conferences did their pastor(s) attend every year? How many church growth conferences did he attend? How big was the biggest church in town? I think you get my point.

        • April 26, 2012 at 9:40 PM


          From your personal observations, it would appear that many of these megas are not only built on sand, but are having to rely upon secular business principles to keep the money flowing and the doors open. If one location is floundering, open up a new location in a new part of town (more money and a better clientele). As for the camel under the tent, many of the so-called “conservative” megas have probably been very low-key on the homosexual issue for some time now. It is with the increase in blogging and social media that some of their local sermons are becoming widespread. At some point, there will not be much difference between what Joel Osteen peddles and what some of the SBC megachurch pastors peddle. It wrapping on the box maybe different, but inside the box is still pragmatism. Things will only get more curious, particularly with the homosexual demographic that is more predominant in the cities/suburbs. Can these megas afford to turn away or turn off this constituency? We’ll see who is willing to and who will capitulate. Thanks and God bless,


    • Jennifer
      April 27, 2012 at 1:53 AM

      My husband and I have pretty much “signed off” on big names.
      We live overseas and have listened to various pastors’ sermons…we’ve had to tell our team that there are several folks we don’t/won’t listen to….just b/c they speak some truth…..doesn’t negate other views/beliefs they have.
      You’re right….we need to learn to search the scriptures for truth and not think that just b/c someone is popular or well known….they teach Truth all the time.

  5. April 26, 2012 at 12:15 PM

    Jesus did say that there would be churches that “did” all kinds of good things in His name and yet, He would hold one thing against them, didn’t He? the world can love us and our actions may show a grace that condones…and when that occurs, it blurs the clear message of Jesus. At least that is just my viewpoint…don’t know these days who thinks what anymore. Lines to cross are being moved, wiped-out and made obsolete in the changing of times and culture. Yet, it does say when Christ returns, the days will be as the days of Noah…so, instead of going forward and making progress, it appears we are going to go backwards and live as the days of Sodom and Gomorrah…don’t ya think? How far that goes, remains to be seen, I suppose. selahV

  6. April 26, 2012 at 2:07 PM

    Andy Stanley must have ripped 1 Corinthians Chapter 5 completely out of his bible. And it’s ironic that the wife in this case most frequently got together with her ex-husband over meals, when that chapter says don’t even sit down to eat with such a one.

    My, my.

    • Leah
      May 6, 2012 at 11:03 PM

      Andy has preached at least three times on 1 Corinthians 5 and each time has been full of false teaching. The first time I remember was in a message called Judgement Call where he said it was not his job to do discipline on the sexually immoral man and not the job of the family to shun him, but the job of the small group leader. My husband was living in unrepentant sin and neither of the small group leaders would remove him. My children who knew the Bible better than I refused to pray with Dad or eat at the table with him. He deserted us to go to Buckhead church where he is not an attender, but a member.

      Recently (within a month or so), Andy preached on 1 Corinthians 5 and just said that we do a poor job of disciplining (cavelier, almost mocking attitude which is clearly missing the fear of the Lord) and that his point of the message was not about self-proclaimed Christians who are living in sin needing discipline, but that we as a church need to not judge those who are not believers. That is part of 1 Cor 5, but I had difficulty respecting the preaching when I had asked Andy to do discipline on my husband and he refused. Sadly, I have met many people who have gone to Andy for church discipline and he has always turned them down for grace.

      What is so disturbing to me is the amount of false teaching that is increasingly coming out of Andy’s mouth and his lack of concern for SOULS! Evangelism is done out of love for the person’s soul enough to tell them the truth about repentance and what grateful obedience is generated from love for the Son who suffered for my sin. There is no regeneration without repentance. How did Andy care for those souls in homosexuality? How does he care for the souls who say they are Christians but live like hell when the Bible repeatedly warns that those who continue to practice sin will be told to “go away, I never knew you, you who continued in iniquity” by Jesus (Matthew 7:21-23). These were “church” people who called him Lord, Lord!!

      Also recently Andy was preaching on the parable of the talents which starts with the “the kingdom of heaven” is like this and ends with the servant that buried his one talent will be put into “outer darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth”. I was shocked when Andy comforted the audience by saying that did not mean hell!! I went home and every single commentary I looked at said it certainly does mean hell. Jesus talked about hell more than heaven because in His grace he warns people about how you can earn your ticket to hell. What about the broad way vs the narrow way? This is saying “peace, peace when there is no peace”. Andy is going to be held accountable for many falsely assured and false conversions. It is terribly sad, but I prayed myself out and after the April 15 sermon, plus knowing that they had baptized the young, sexually active woman that was going to unbiblically marry my unbiblical ex-husband at Buckhead, I had to withdraw my membership.

      Andy almost got it right when he preached on divorce and remarriage including Matthew 5:32, but as the sermon was almost to an end what he had been calling sin all throughout the message he reduced to a slap on the hand. He actually said that he tells his pastors that if the unbiblically divorced person has waited two or three years to remarry that they can go ahead and get married which according to Jesus IS ADULTERY. Really! A sin today isn’t a sin in a couple of years? Adulterers do not get into heaven unless that is what they WERE. The woman caught in adultery was forgiven but it became what she WAS when she went to go and sin no more. If she had gone back to that life, she would be rejecting Jesus and trampling on the blood of his sacrifice. Jude 4 says that many are in the church using the grace of Jesus Christ as a license to sin and they are condemned. They are wolves leading people astray instead of calling them to the victory in Jesus that can be had just as Romans 6 says. Andy doesn’t preach on 1 Thessalonians 4 or many controversial scriptures. The worst for me was when he was preaching on Acts chapter by chapter. I prayed an entire Saturday for the next day’s preaching on Acts chapter 5 where the husband and wife are both struck dead by God IN THE CHURCH for grieving the Holy Spirit with ONE LIE. God never changes. I have to say also I really didn’t appreciate his message where he talked about Joel Osteen with admiration about his church being number one and NP being number three. Joel is clearly known by most people with spiritual discernment as being a false teacher and prosperity gospel. Andy was admiring him for sharing the gospel each week, but it is a cheap grace, easy beievism, name it and claim it gospel– not the truth. When Andy shared the gospel almost a year ago, my teenaged son walked out of the service and said “that sure was lacking”. People just want what their itching ears want to hear and the great communicator seems to want to be popular more than he wants to please God by being straight (no pun intended) with the people. Christ is all about life change. NO Jesus, No change. Know Jesus, Know change.

      • AM
        June 25, 2012 at 6:21 AM

        Leah, I can’t imagine so deep a sense of betrayal–at home and at church–for you and yours. I wish your family never had to experience any of that.

      • Bryan
        November 19, 2012 at 12:58 PM

        Wow ! That was great. I concur with everything said here. God Bless

        • November 20, 2012 at 11:16 AM


          Thanks for reading and for taking the time to comment. I really appreciate it. God bless,


  7. Jeff
    April 26, 2012 at 5:34 PM

    This book review may explain some of Andy Stanley’s thinking here:

    I suppose my most serious concern about this book is that Andy Stanley seems to have some fundamental confusion about the nature of the church. For example, in explaining the importance of inviting people to church, he writes on page 2: “Believers are responsible for leveraging their relational influence for the sake of the kingdom of God. That’s the part they can do that we—the church—can’t.” They, the believers—we, the church. Biblically, though, the believers are the church, and the church is the assembly of believers. Later, on page 77, he explains that he does not require members of his Welcome Teams to be believers. The defense is that “for many seekers, community is the door to conversion.” That certainly may be, but does that community really have to be found in the group of people who welcomes others to your church meetings? Seems to me you’d want the first faces that newcomers see at your church to be genuinely converted Christians who are excited to be serving their Lord! There are other ways to give “seekers” a community that doesn’t put them in a position of representing the church.

    • April 26, 2012 at 9:33 PM


      There are obviously lines that we would all draw as to when a unbeliever could “serve” or volunteer within the church and when they couldn’t. I would agree with you that those on a Welcome Team should be converted Chrisitians who are walking in fellowship with the Lord, albeit they will not be perfect. This “sin is sin is sin” argument is not even valid, as it seems that God punished some sin differently than other sin. I think we blur the lines between grace and truth when we try to lump every sin into the same category. Murder is different than speeding. Will any sin separate those outside of Christ from a loving and holy God? Absolutely. We have all sinned and fall short of his glory. But, the community of the church is supposed to be those who are born-again. Are there tares among the wheat? Yes. But, open, unrepented of sin is a completely different story. Thanks and God bless,


    • Leah
      May 6, 2012 at 11:16 PM

      Great review. I think the best sermon on grace is the classic by George Whitfield called the Method of Grace. You can listen to it on youtube. Grace is a process that results in true conversion and the change of heart. Ezekiel 36: 25 “Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean. Your filth will be washed away, and you will no longer worship idols. 26 And I will give you a new heart, and I will put a new spirit in you. I will take out your stony, stubborn heart and give you a tender, responsive heart. 27 And I will put my Spirit in you so that you will follow my decrees and be careful to obey my regulations.” No one is born again without the indwelling Holy Spirit and while Andy has preached on John 3, he never has included the entire Word in John 3:36 “And anyone who believes in God’s Son has eternal life. Anyone who doesn’t obey the Son will never experience eternal life but remains under God’s angry judgment.” This is the grace of God to give us the power of the Holy Spirit to be convicted about sin, hate it in us, cause us to love the Lord with everything we have and surrender to live a new life that wants to stay clean and obey because we love Him.

  8. Lydia
    April 26, 2012 at 8:14 PM

    We used to have a whole group of Catholic women who worked as greeters for the early bird service. Then they left before service to attend late Mass. I kid you not. I am not putting them down for being Catholic but the point is, how can that be the Body? They just liked the mega and wanted to volunteer. And nobody is asking doctrinal questions, anyway.

    One mega had a “guest services” dept. So I inquired about how they do “guests” and was astonished to find out that the “guests” were actually members! (They had another dept for visitors) They considered that members were really “guests” who came every week and should be treated as “guests” while there. Just stop and think about that one.

    Would you like some fries with that?

  9. J.
    April 26, 2012 at 9:34 PM

    Mr. Scott,

    I appreciate your thoughts. I have downloaded Andy’s sermons for years, heard him speak a couple of times, and read two of his books, and really feel that I have gained excellent insight into my personal relationship with Christ through his messages.

    I also listened to the sermon you referenced, and found myself feeling very uncomfortable with his illustration. I think you are spot-on with your concerns, and I wondered the same thing: while he stopped just short of out-and-out condoning homosexuality, didn’t he condone it by pointing out the sin of adultery and not the other?

    You also omitted that toward the end, he seemed to be indicating that he regretted his decision to deny them leadership roles for any reason – even their public adultery. I would have almost understood a little better if he had originally said that he didn’t deny leadership roles to anyone, regardless of any manner of public sin. The fact, though, the he seemed to be a placing a higher degree of sinfulness on heterosexual adultery, as if living in homosexuality was a more-acceptable public lifestyle was quite troubling. I would think either should be quite sufficient to preclude leadership opportunities.

    I have no desire to cast stones, as I don’t qualify for the job; but I don’t agree with holding those gentlemen up as shining examples of active members of the Body of Christ.

    • April 26, 2012 at 9:47 PM


      Thanks for stopping by and sharing your thoughts on this. To be honest, there was so much in the illustration that I could have touched on to make a couple of posts. I think that I was still so dumbfounded that I did not even hear clearly what you referenced — that Andy Stanley regretted his decision to deny them leadership roles for any reason. What struck my Student Pastor and me was what appeared to be Stanley’s and the Buckhead campus’ pastors’ “advice” for the gay partner to divorce his wife so that he would no longer be committing adultery. It was both the heterosexual adultery angle, but also the divorce issue. Why not counsel someone in open, blantant sin to stop it and try to reconcile with your wife. Instead, it was divorce the wife, keep living with your homosexual lover, and you can serve. All without so much as saying a word (at least in the illustration) which would indicate that the homosexual relationship was at least one the same level as the adultery. I am still somewhat agitated by all this. I would expect some other well-know pastors to say something like Andy did, but I was not at all expecting it from him. Thanks and God bless,


  10. Dennis
    April 29, 2012 at 8:01 PM

    Hey Howell,

    This is a great point …

    “What struck my Student Pastor and me was what appeared to be Stanley’s and the Buckhead campus’ pastors’ “advice” for the gay partner to divorce his wife so that he would no longer be committing adultery. It was both the heterosexual adultery angle, but also the divorce issue. Why not counsel someone in open, blantant sin to stop it and try to reconcile with your wife. Instead, it was divorce the wife, keep living with your homosexual lover, and you can serve. All without so much as saying a word (at least in the illustration) which would indicate that the homosexual relationship was at least one the same level as the adultery. I am still somewhat agitated by all this”

    I’ve served as a youth group leader at North Point for over 4 years, I have two small boys who attend their Wamuba Land program, and I was appalled by this message …

    “Marriage not working out because the husband now considers himself gay … no bother … just get divorced and now you can serve in the church”

    I realize that may not have been Andy’s intention, but that is what was clearly conveyed.

    • April 29, 2012 at 9:22 PM


      Thanks for reading and taking the time to comment. I had to listen to this message several times to make sure that I did not misunderstand what Andy Stanley was saying. You confirm that I did not misunderstand what he was conveying, but that it was clear. If he had not had the accompanying graphics to help illustrate his story, I might think that Andy had just mis-spoken. But, with a master communicator like Andy Stanley, I think he had a clear point he was trying to make. I’m just not sure that he was expecting anyone to question the underlying priciples that he conveyed in his illustration. I would hope he would make some type of clarification, but I doubt that he will. Thanks again for stopping by. God bless,


  11. May 1, 2012 at 6:08 AM

    A few days ago I saw a tweet from Dr. Mohler expressing dismay at the sellout of the Gospel from an influential pulpit and praying for how to respond biblically. Today he responded to what Andy Stanley said:

    • May 1, 2012 at 9:29 AM


      Thanks for the link to Dr. Mohler’s message. It is spot-on and adds much needed clarity to this issue. Hope you have a great day and God bless,


  12. Caleb
    May 1, 2012 at 9:17 AM

    I don’t think that Andy was approving of homosexuality in any way. I’ve heard him say that there’s a difference between acceptance and approval. We need to be ready to accept anyone into our churches, but that doesn’t mean that we have to approve of the sin. I think there is a tension between acceptance and approval.

    Also, in the message Andy never said that he approved of their homosexuality. When he described the “family” at Christmas eve service, he even said “there was grace and truth with all of its hard lessons”

    • May 1, 2012 at 10:42 AM


      Thanks for reading and taking the time to comment. I would encourage you to read Dr. Albert Mohler’s post that was linked to by Barbara. I’m not sure anyone thinks (or at least hopes) that Andy Stanley was approving of homosexuality in any way, but the clear implication of his illustration was otherwise. That someone of Dr. Mohler’s stature inferred what I and others inferred from Andy Stanley’s illustration at least shows that he needs to clarify what he meant. We all say things that others infer one thing when we meant something different. Sometimes it’s what we don’t say that gets us in trouble in our communication. On this issue, I think that it would behoove Andy to issue some type of clarification as soons as possible. Thanks again for stopping by. God bless,


  13. Debbie
    May 1, 2012 at 2:20 PM

    I also wrote off Andy Stanley years ago because of his involvement in the Catalyst Conferences promoting Perry Noble, Rob Bell, and Erwin McManus and the like. I find that he doesn’t seem to have much in the way of discernment. The sermon in question was very sad to say the least He doesn’t seem to understand church discipline. As the apostle Paul wrote….watch your life and your doctrine carefully!

  14. Faith
    May 1, 2012 at 3:43 PM

    I too hope there will be some kind of clarification. I will put this out there. A month ago I attended an orientation for becoming a leader or host in one of the children ministries at the BB location. One thing that they talked about, as well as gave a printed statement from NPM, was they asked that if anyone was there that was wanting to volunteer that was a homosexual or living with someone outside of marriage or a recovering addict of either alcohol or drugs, to excuse themselves from volunteering. There may have been more exclusions, but this is what I remembered. They said they weren’t excluding anyone, but perhaps there is a better place for them to be. I can’t remember the verbiage they used, but I assumed maybe introduce them to a small group? Just thought I’d post this since the serving issue came up in Andys sermon.

    • May 1, 2012 at 5:11 PM


      Thanks for taking the time to read and to share some of your personal insights into this issue. In terms of “exlusion” from volunteering in Children’s Ministry, it would not be surprising that NP — like many churches, including the one I pastor — have tighter boundaries for those who are eligible to serve. When adults are in close proximity to minors, you want to make sure that you are extremely careful in insuring the protection and safety of children and youth. That is certainly understandable that North Point would at least discourage — if not exclude — the cateories of people that you mentioned from serving in the Chilren’s ministry. That still does not answer the question as to what North Point’s policy is regarding homosexuals from serving in the church. Of course, I am not talking about attending or worhsipping, because our churches should be open to everyone to attend. However, serving and/or being members is something different.

      Apart from the sermon that is in question, do you know what North Point’s policies — formal or informal — are regarding homosexuals (or heterosexual couples living together outside of marriage) being able to either serve at NP or one of its campuses or to actually join NP? Any insight on that would be much appreciated. I do hope that Andy Stanley issues some type of clarification that would indicate that he still holds to a Biblical position on the issue of homosexuality. Thanks again for stopping by and commenting. God bless,


  15. Dennis
    May 1, 2012 at 5:08 PM

    I’m concerned. I fully understand what the scripture has to say in regard to homosexuality. I also understand what the bible teaches in regard to a number of other sins (many of which were referenced in the above comments). I believe a church has the right to operate as they feel best, hopefully, keeping to the teachings of Christ. What is really bothersome is the practice of excluding some people (sinners) from membership in a church family due to the visibility or activeness of their sin. A couple or individual who identifies as homosexual should not be treated as second class within the church anymore than a couple or individual who struggles with a sin that is less visible. Should we introduce polygraphs and extensive background interviews as protocol for membership? Sounds less like a church were we go to worship our Lord and more like an exclusive organization for people who believe their sin is less than others.
    I realize the concern with this sermon has more to do with Andy’s lack of clarification about the lifestyle being acknowledged as sin, but the conversation of whether or not people living in sin should be allowed to join a church, as members, has me looking for a better understanding of what Jesus would expect.

    • May 1, 2012 at 5:31 PM


      Thanks for reading and for asking some very good and thoughtful questions. At the outset, let me say that I agree that all sin separates us from a loving and holy God. Therefore, in one sense, the sin of homosexuality and the sin of lying would both be sins which would keep us out of heaven. It is only through the shed blood of Jesus Christ on the cross for sinners that we can enter into God’s presence. We come by God’s grace through faith in the finished work of Jesus. There is no sin which is so big that God could not forgive, and that includes the sin of homosexual behavior. To the extent that Andy Stanley was preaching about God’s grace being available for all, regardless of their sin, I would wholeheartedly agree. It is the same message that I preach, as well.

      Where the confusion comes is on the particular issue of open, ongoing, and unrepentant sin, in this case homosexuality. Are there other sins that are more easily hidden? Yes. But, that does not negate the fact that homosexual acts — along with heterosexual acts such as sex before marriage (living together) or outside of marriage (adultery) — are sinful. I suppose it comes down to how you interpret this comment that you made: “A couple or individual who identifies as homosexual should not be treated as second class within the church anymore than a couple or individual who struggles with a sin that is less visible.” We all struggle with sin, but the key word is “struggle.” We should not give into sin, whatever that sin might be. We will have lapses from time to time with particular sin, but it should not be a settled lifesytle. I would agree with you that we should help those individuals and couples who “struggle with” homosexuality (or heterosexual sin), but that does not mean that we condone the sin or say nothing to those who apparently are not struggling, but have settled into that sin. I would no more encourage someone to stay settled into the sin of adultery than I would to stay settled into the sin of homosexual conduct.

      If that’s what you mean by “struggle,” then we would agree. However, if you do not see homosexual conduct (as opposed to a struggle with same-sex attraction that is not acted on) as being what the Bible describes as sin, then we will come to two very different conclusions on this point. It is not just that Andy Stanley was ambiguous and confusing in his illustration. It is, rather, what he and North Point believe when it comes to homosexual conduct — is it sinful or not? There maybe tension in how we apply the Biblical truth in a grace-filled way, but to not view homosexual conduct as sinful is to depart from a Biblical standard and definition of truth and to misapply grace. Thanks again for stopping by. I look forward to continued dialogue with you on this issue. God bless,


  16. May 2, 2012 at 2:06 AM

    Really, what concerns me most about this is how quickly the Christian community is willing to turn on itself. Sure, there is clarification needed because it can be inferred from his illustration that homosexuality OS okay….but he neither said nor implies such a thing. Nevertheless, we are quick to mount our high horse and don or best savior of the world gear and go into attack mode citing a need to protect….

    It really is an ugly thing that we do and to think that the unsaved world doesn’t notice and walk further away from the cross is only further deceiving ourselves. Yes, we need to decern, and yes we need to protect those that we are charged with protecting…but I don’t think we need to do so on the Internet.

    Is it possible that Andy has softened…sure.

    However, after a quick look at their website, those with same sex attraction are not permitted to serve (at least in the areas I could find an application for) and many do ask about a volunteers stance on homosexuality.
    Here’s a sample application for one of their ministries:

    • May 2, 2012 at 8:00 AM


      I can’t speak for how others approached this issue, but I’m not sure that my post could be characterized as an “attack.” Was I perplexed and dumbfounded by what Andy Stanley implied and I and many, many others, including some North Point members who have commented here, inferred from the very clear (and graphics supported) illustration that he used in his sermon? Absolutely. Andy’s sermon was not only preached in public, but it has been put on a website that is also public. Therefore, it is available for anyone to watch and comment on. Faith above has already commented on certain “exclusions” (or at least discouragements) to volunteering in Children’s Ministry at NP. The sample application that you linked to is for working with students. As I shared with Faith, I think that it is entirely reasonable that NP would have tighter boundaries for who would be eligible to volunteer with minors. That still does not answer the question about serving in general or about church membership at NP for those who are openly gay (or, for that matter, heterosexual couples who are known to be living together without being married).

      I suppose the question that remains unclear at this point is just how much Andy Stanley and North Point have “softened” on homosexuality (i.e., homosexual conduct) as it pertains to the church? It would not be very difficult for Andy Stanley to issue some type of clariying statement, particularly given the widespread (and growing) consternation over his initial illustration. That he has been unwilling, thus far, to issue such a statement is both perplexing and telling. If he does not issue a clarification, we may have an answer to just how far he and NP have softened on this issue. Thanks for taking the time to read and to comment this morning. God bless,


  17. May 2, 2012 at 9:59 AM

    Because he is a leader in the Christian community, it is entirely reasonable that we seek clarification and even that we ask him or his church what their stance is on homosexuality.

    As for what you say about the characterization of your post: while I was speaking more about the community at large, even your post would fit into what I would consider an attack. I realize that public figures need to have a thicker skin, but if I were in his position I would certain see your post and the many others questioning my walk with God as an attack. I believe there is a certain responsibility as a family that we go to one another to seek clarification.

    As a blogger, I can also see the opportunity here – but at Andy’s expense. I think we could ask the questions and even give our own points of view without making assumptions that take shots.

    • May 2, 2012 at 10:31 AM


      I appreciate the dialogue. Dennis has already answered what I would have said, namely that I have not questioned Andy Stanley’s “walk with God.” I have written far more pointed posts on folks like Mark Driscoll and Joel Osteen. My post on Andy Stanley was written from a bias of being pre-disposed to liking Andy Stanley and much of what he has taught, particularly through some of his books which have profited me immensely. Quite frankly, it would be my hope and desire that Andy Stanley issue a statement which would clarify that his illustration had been misunderstood and that neither he nor North Point condoned homosexual practice. Given the widespread publicity that this has generated, I think it would be beneficial for Andy Stanley to make such a clarifying statement. He has been given that opportunity. If he issued such a statement, then this would be a non-issue. However, if he does not issue such a statement, then what are we to conclude from Andy’s silence in light of the confusion which he is at least partly, if not fully, responsible for? What about his non-repsonse to members of NP, like Dennis and others, who have specifically asked for a clarification? I am not making assumptions. However, I will make conclusions based upon what Andy Stanley does or does not say on this issue going forward. Silence at this point is simply not an option. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts. God bless,


  18. michael
    May 2, 2012 at 10:04 AM

    north point member,
    “If NPCC, or any other church, began turning away homosexuals, then, in order to be consistent, the church would need to turn away anyone guilty of sexual (or any other) sin, and you would end up in an empty church.”

    you are right. we shouldn’t turn them away, we should compel them to repent of their sins and ask forgiveness from God based in the shed blood of Jesus. if they refuse, we shouldn’t allow them to serve OR ‘accept’ them as part of the Body of Christ in church. simple as that. that is what the Word of God says. have we become so blinded by society and unwilling to recieve the ‘shame’ of the world for not being ‘like it’ that we have allowed ouselves to become sub-christians in a sub-gospel ‘church’ culture? Wake up and open your bible.

  19. Dennis
    May 2, 2012 at 10:17 AM


    No one is questioning Andy’s “walk with God” … that’s a convenient strawman argument to gloss over the question at hand, summed as:

    Can sexual deviants (of any perversion of the Gospel … be it pedophile, sodomy, adultery, porn addicts, etc.) serve in any capacity or become members of NPCC?

    If the answer is no, what makes sexual perversion of Homosexuality (per the Gospel) special? Societal mores?

    That’s the root basis of the post and the subsequent comments you see in this post.

    I have no doubt where Andy falls on this issue. My concern was (and still is) that I’ve put my works and money into a church that has decided to special class one group of sexual deviants simply because secular norms say we have to do it. That slippery slope leads itself to eventually allowing all sexual deviants to serve and become members …

    As I voiced to the senior leadership at the church, I don’t want anyone teaching my boys that sexual deviancy of any kind is okay … or abortion … or any other secular principles that completely ignore large sections of the Gospel, and Andy’s message seemed to be like a 60’s Woodstock speech … “just love one another and forget about the rest … you’re all going to the promised land” … the entire series has seemed that way.

    • May 2, 2012 at 12:36 PM


      You seem to be a regular attender or member. Did you attend or hear the messages The New Rules for Love, Sex and Dating ( or The Shocking Statements of Jesus (

      Both series were very expliciet that the only place for sex is in marriage and that divorce is wrong and a sin.

      I really don’t get where Andy needs to make special statements that homosexuality is wrong when he has been very clear that ANY sex outside of marriage is sin.

      • May 2, 2012 at 12:42 PM


        I appreciate the dialogue that we have had over at BtT. Thanks for stopping by here to comment. Look forward to continuing the dialogue on this issue or any others down the line. Thanks and God bless,


      • KING
        May 4, 2012 at 8:02 AM

        Every exhortation that Paul gives in the epistles are concerning things we already know but yet he continues to exhort us.
        If believing should take you to heaven then Jesus Christ should have just believe and be saved but contrariwise he has said believe not and ye shall be damned. There are two sides to the coin. Truth is complete only when the pro and con are clearly spelt out.

    • Jesse
      May 6, 2012 at 4:05 PM

      Dennis, I don’t think I’ve communicated my point well.
      My intent is not to make some Strawman argument to gloss over the point – my intent is for each of us to pause and ask ourselves if we are building the kingdom or damaging it.

      Members of NPCC, like yourselves should seek clarification from your leaders – this is an important issue. Those of us that are not members should not accuse Andy or others from any other church of traveling down a slippery slope, making a soft landing, or outright heresy because of something they didn’t say.

      I too, hope that Andy clarifies publicly what his stance and the stance of NPCC is – I have friends that attend and I have found his input in my life extremely valuable both personally and professionally. However, until the time that it is clarified, I’m going to reserve judgement as I think all non-member of that church should – or at they very least we should keep our opinions to ourselves.
      As for members of the church, I think you too should first seek clarification…but if you are met with silence, that is the time you should consider further action. Why shouldn’t non-members act because of silence? Because NPCC is not responsible to us but to their members (and, of course to our Creator).

      I don’t think that most people will agree with NPCCs stance when and if it is made public. They’ve had a long record (I believe since inception) of allowing non-members to serve in certain roles…and I see that as a valid way to reach people. However, that is a very difficult road to navigate and I have not found it one worth traveling.

      That said, Homosexuality is a sin and a practicing homosexual should not be permitted membership to the body of Christ. Can an active sinner help advance the kingdom….with God, it is certainly possible, but, like I said, I’ve yet to travel that road.

  20. Dennis
    May 2, 2012 at 10:21 AM


    Exactly. Sexual deviant who wants to come to church, repent, and be saved. No problem.

    But don’t say “I only do sexual deviancy during the week … on Sundays, I stop … ” just so you can be a host or member in the church. Allowing folks who practice this kind of Christianity will result in a far more secular, sinful society in the future …

  21. michael
    May 5, 2012 at 2:39 PM

    so, was the point of andy’s illustration that the ex-wife was in the wrong for holding the husband to ‘truth’ and requiring repentance for reconciliation and that she ‘softened’ in Grace by accepting the ‘partner’ and the ex-husband back into the family situation?

    how dare they make the ex-wife the bad guy and totally ignore the sin of homosexuality in the husband’s life…

  22. Terry Galloway
    May 8, 2012 at 4:51 PM

    This is not the first false teaching that Andy Stanley has done, it is just the first time others have noticed.I think that we should be talking about all sexual immorality that is willful sin when God’s expectations are clearly known by the professing believer. Andy says the truth but doesn’t expect repentance for reconciliation. Thank you to Michael for pointing out the woman and the innocent daughter in this case. I am a woman much like her except my husband was adulterous, divorced me unbiblically and continued in adultery by dating women at Buckhead church. I met with Andy twice for a couple of hours each time, but he told me that I had to accept that he would not do church discipline on my MEMBER husband at Buckhead. On the Buckhead membership application it asks:
    Membership at Buckhead Church signifies a willingness to partner with us and be identified as a follower of Christ – death to your old life and having received a new life through Christ. Although everyone is a sinner, life in Christ should be seen in our daily life.

    Is your lifestyle reflective of your life in Christ?

    Yes No I would like to speak to someone
    I assume that my husband lied about this since he is deceived to believing that he is a Christian and recently told me that he knew he would go to heaven but that God would punish him for his sins there! Andy did remove him from the host team. But if you really examine Andy’s teaching for years, the repentance word is almost never mentioned. He used to not even mention the sin word very much, but now it seems that he is using the grace of Jesus Christ as a license to sin as the Bible points out in Jude 4 and 2 Peter 2 and 3. In his Judgment Call message he preached on 1 Corinthians 5 and said that church discipline was not his job or the job of the family. My children all had asked Dad to repent and since he refused, they would not eat with him because they went to a Christian school and knew what God expected. Andy said it was the job of the small group leaders to “expel the man”. Wrong. I did ask both of his two small group leaders (one was a Northpoint member) to do what Andy said, but they both refused. When i asked Andy if I could go to the elders about this need (in order to save my husband and restore my family plus OBEY God) he told me that no I couldn’t because he is the final authority.

    Andy has preached two other times on 1 Corinthians 5 and most recently said that we do a poor job of discipline on Christians (those saying that they are Christians and live in sexual sin) and almost mocked God in saying that Paul said so that they would be turned over to Satan to bring about a change. But his focus of the message was on how Christians shouldn’t treat unbelievers to our standards, That is totally true but to abdicate responsibility for obeying God prescription for any sexual sin that a “believer” is caught up in is very poor leadership. I also tried to point out other preachers who do preach church discipline such as Francis Chan, Matt Carter (Austin Stone Community Church), etc. Unfortunately, I know several other women who have sought Andy to do discipline, and he has refused them too. It seems that he loves those who are sinfully rebelling instead of those who are trying to live biblically. I asked the church how were they loving on me, but they had no answer.

    They do baptize people who are living in sin. My husband who unbiblically divorced me as a member of Buckhead Church and therefore should not date and remarry because that is additional adultery according to Matt. 5:32 got remarried Easter weekend without telling me or his children. He sent us an email that he had remarried. After doing some research I found her name and discovered the video of the her baptism the week before the wedding at Buckhead Church. I am sorry that she has never been married before and is now unbiblically remarried. This gets me to some more of Andy’s false teaching. In the Shocking Statements of Jesus series, he preached on divorce and remarriage. First he gave the truth of what the Bible says. Then he said “this is what I think and tell my pastors”… if the people wanting to get remarried have waited two years from the divorce, then they can marry them if they want. So the adultery of divorcing your wife when she has not been unfaithful, and the adultery of remarriage which makes the person who marries you an adulteress is somehow magically not a sin if you wait two years? It seems clear that Andy is using grace as a license to sin.

    Additional false teaching has been presented on the parable of the talents(Matt 25) which starts off as the kingdom of God is like… and ends with the useless servant who buried his money and disappointed the master being “put into outer darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth”. As soon as Andy read it, he said to the audience “don’t worry, this doesn’t mean hell” and gave a face and gnashing of teeth explaination of what it really meant. I was disgusted. How are we to win people to Christ if we don’t tell them the truth? Francis Chan’s book Erasing Hell talks about this problem in churches today. Sadly many are going to being hearing Matthew 7:21-23 from Jesus–only those who obey the will of God will enter heaven, you can call me Lord, Lord, do lots of great works, but since you continued in disobedience/lawlessness/sin, “Go away, I never knew you”.

    I had to remove my membership because I could not submit to his authority any more when he is getting so unbiblical. He preached on Acts, but refused to cover Acts 5 of how God handled the sin of lying. He doesn’t preach on 1 John 3 or Hebrews and if you deliberately keep on sinning. It isn’t truly loving people if you are not encouraging them to repent. It is telling them peace, peace when there is no peace. Charles Spurgeon and George Whitefield are still right. Whitefield’s Method of Grace sermon which is online tells what true grace is to win people to Christ. Andy will be preaching scripture and stop short if there is something controversial. He doesn’t preach on Psalm 15 of who will get into God’s kingdom….
    Who may worship in your sanctuary, Lord?
    Who may enter your presence on your holy hill?
    2 Those who lead blameless lives and do what is right,
    speaking the truth from sincere hearts.
    3 Those who refuse to gossip
    or harm their neighbors
    or speak evil of their friends.
    4 Those who despise flagrant sinners,
    and honor the faithful followers of the Lord,
    and keep their promises even when it hurts.
    He doesn’t preach on anything to do with hell. I fear it seems that he may be growing to support universalism. He had William P. Young of The Shack come and speak at Buckhead Church one evening which is also false teaching as has been pointed out by Albert Mohler, Michael Youssef, Tim Challies and so on. He is a universalist. If you read 2 Peter 2 there are definitely red flags to be seen.He had Michele Obama come speak to the church which bothered a lot of folks because of the administration’s position on abortion.

    I was a false coversion in a liberal Baptist church myself, and fortunately through this chaos, I came to my own repentance, surrender and receiving the Holy Spirit. I was baptized at Northpoint after my liberal Baptist church refused to baptize me (since I had been baptized at 12 though no real signs of conversion) and the pastor wrote me a note to leave the church. I have warned Andy over and over about producing false conversions, but he does not respond. I warned the Lead Pastor of the Northpoint campus about Andy’s false teaching and he did not respond. The staff of pastors that also preach there are great. I have never heard a false teaching word from them, but Andy is totally in charge. Biblical illiteracy makes it very easy for these preachers. We are commanded to test what we hear against the Scriptures.Unfortunately cheap grace, easy believism and the watered-down gospel create believers who are not disciples. I was happy to hear Andy point out that a true Christian is a follower, but I don’t know how many will get it when there is no call to holiness and godly living.

    Not long ago Andy mentioned with admiration Joel Osteen. He gave a personal story of Joel talking to Andy about having a preacher father. He mentioned that Joel is number 1 and that NP is number 3. He said he so admired Joel preaching the gospel in every message. I submit that most people with biblical discernment know that Joel preaches the prosperity gospel. Andy doesn’t preach the prosperity gospel, but the easy believism gospel or antinomian gospel. For an explanation of these go to

    I really believe Andy wants to be a church for only unbelievers and those that are only desiring “milk”. He thinks that there are enough churches out there for the meat eaters. The only problem is that he will be held responsible for those who listened to him and did not progress to the desire for meat because he rationalized sin, didn’t call them to holy living and only gave the grace of God without warning of the wrath of God against sin. Ezekel 2 and 3 tell us that the messenger must deliver the message or he will be held accountable by God for those who die in their sins. If he delivers the message and they don’t listen, they will die in their sins, but he will have saved himself.

    One more example, Andy preached on John 3 and being born again, but he left out John 3:36 And anyone who believes in God’s Son has eternal life. Anyone who doesn’t obey the Son will never experience eternal life but remains under God’s angry judgment.” God in His marvelous grace gives us so many warnings because He is a just God. Fully grace, fully truth, fully justice, fully severe– Reading Knowing God by J. I. Packer takes the focus off of who we are and who He is. To God be the glory.

    • March 5, 2017 at 7:45 AM

      Something you wrote caught my eye. You stated: “He [Andy Stanley] had William P. Young of The Shack come and speak at Buckhead Church one evening”.

      I would love to be able to confirm whether or not that is true. Given how much criticism is out there for The Shack, I would think there would be a large number of Andy Stanley critics pointing this out, but after scouring the internet, I can find no other reference to this happening.

      If it did happen, it is worthy of bringing it to people’s attention. I believe The Shack to be a book full of false doctrine and it would be troubling why Andy would give him such a platform.

      If it didn’t happen, then it is not fair to Andy to make such a false statement. His plate is full enough dealing with honest criticism. Can you provide anything to document William P. Young spoke at Buckhead Church?

  23. Michael W
    May 15, 2012 at 2:22 PM

    I must first admit I didn’t read every comment, so this may be redundant. I have a friend that goes to Northpoint and we spoke about this sermon. My thought was that most people criticizing Andy have a “traditional” (for lack of a better word) view of the boundaries of the local church. In my definition of that view, serving as host is the job of a member only, and members are confessing believers who agree on all major doctrinal points. In this case membership is like a fence helping us all know who is in and who is out.

    But Andy’s church looks at “church involvement” differently. They are less concerned about fences and more concerned about drawing everyone towards the center, which in theory is Christ. I’m pretty sure that at Northpoint you can serve and participate without being a confessing believer, or a repentant believer if you prefer. There are probably many designations for a person’s involvement, and “membership” may not even have Baptism as a prerequisite. At the end of the day it’s their organization and they can set up the membership criteria as they like as long as they aren’t trying to equate their membership with the Kingdom of God’s membership (which I don’t think they are). Andy and NPCC may be firmly against homosexual behavior and still allow those practicing homosexuality to be hosts if that is the way they choose to run their organization.

    Notice that I’m taking pains not to equate the NPCC organization with the Universal Church. If they are making the same distinction, then I have no problem with their involvement criteria being whatever they think best. I think they have the right of it, minimizing fences designating church membership and emphasizing instead the drawing of people from whatever designation (i.e. passive observer) towards Christ at the center. to dig further, NPCC has crafted their outreach to make the worship/preaching service a community event, similar to a concert. Come one, come all… greatest show on earth. They expect the attendance of large numbers of un-saved. And rather than expecting those un-saved to hear a message, walk down to front, pray the payer and become a member they have opted to draw the un-saved in slowly through acclimation. The truth is many people accept Christ like this in churches that have no vision for this type of spiritual journey, and NPCC chooses to emphasize this slow journey in their ministry plan.

    I’m not a lover of mega-churches for other reasons, but I have no problem with any church that chooses to raise the cross at the center and make few if any organizational distinctions about where the saved/unsaved border is. This may be naive and even unfruitful in the long haul, but I don’t think we can do Andy justice in this discussion until we at least recognize there is a different paradigm at work here.

    • May 15, 2012 at 9:45 PM


      I appreciate you taking the time to read and to comment. I don’t necessarily have a problem with churches, including NPCC, drawing different lines regarding “church involvement.” That will, of necessity, look different depending on the context that a church finds itself in. My Student Pastor and I were having that conversation today with regards to our upcoming Vacation Bible School. Would we allow non-members/non-Christians to serve snacks during VBS? Probably. Would we let non-members/non-Christians serve as teachers? No. My argument is not with different paradigms. It is when those paradigms are so different that they redefine what it means to be a Biblical church. Even if NPCC uses different methods for outreach and evangelism, they nevertheless are still a church. While we might disagree as to what the borders or boundaries are for a church, there will come a point where the paradigm could no longer be considered a “church” as defined by Scripture.

      I’m not saying that is where NPCC is, but no church — including NPCC — gets to set their own rules entirely. Scripture is key, or at least it should be for those churches which are Evangelical and consider the Bible to be the final authority for our faith AND practice. Thanks again for stopping by. God bless,


  24. Terry Galloway
    May 20, 2012 at 11:54 PM

    NPCC/Buckhead church and so on have as their belief statement that they believe in the inerrancy of the Bible. If that were true, then Andy wouldn’t be able to say he won’t follow 1 Corinthians 5 and Matthew 18 for conflicts among MEMBERS. He won’t do it, as I have asked him repeatedly to do it to my adulterous MEMBER husband. They just baptized his adulteress and then unbiblically married them on Easter weekend. This is no way to treat me or my children. Unfortunately over the 6.5 years that I was a member there, I have heard of many who asked him to do discipline and he wouldn’t. I heard of Matthew 18 type conflicts too (not sexual)where the people were following the steps to conflict resolution, but when the church is notified, they refuse to help the people. In the cases I know about, the rich people win out over the poorer people (all MEMBERS) by not having any resolution in favor of the poorer people. One of the couples had a poorer woman that grew up with Andy Stanley and Louie Giglio, but she still got no help when she had been clearly wronged financially. A lady in my neighborhood told me that she had asked Andy to do discipline on her adulterous husband and Andy wouldn’t. She told me it is because Andy uses her husband’s private jet when he needs to fly. Read 2 Peter 2 and see if you think there are some major red flags.

    I have talked with the Director of Membership several times, and she just says that she knows my position (which is to follow the Bible), but that they haven’t changed their minds. I spoke to her again the day I removed my membership. I told her it was irresponsible how they were handling people who believe that they are saved, are members and are living in open, willful, deliberate sin. I asked her how the church had loved me and my children, but she didn’t answer. Could it be that she wants my husband’s money for the church since he is a high paid attorney? I have been a stay at home mom for 23 years. The new 18-20 years younger wife is a working woman who has never been married or had children. So she has more money that I do too. I tithe each month, but I give the tithe where the Lord tells me to which was rarely to NPCC.

    A pastor should have a BURDEN for the souls that are listening to him. Here is an article about Bill Bright who realized near death, that he had gotten the true gospel wrong…
    “Bright elevated the Biblical principle of prosperity and peace with God above the message of repentance from sin as the primary motive for accepting Christ as savior. Without emphasizing Hell and the just requirement of the Law, Bright convinced his audience to accept the sacrifice of Jesus as the only way of receiving the blessings of God. This ultimately resulted in the American Evangelical Gospel being further stripped of the means to convict of real sin. ( As opposed to legal standing, or forensic “sin”.) For more on this subject, please see Hell’s Best Kept Secret (Ray Comfort/Way of the Master).”

    A pastor needs to have a fear of the Lord and constantly be aware of how he will be held to a higher standard by God for his teaching. Andy is always complimented as being a great leader and runs leadership training conference, but a really great leader does the difficult task of church discipline to bring about the repentance of that soul just as the Bible prescribes in 1 Corinthians 5.

    • emc
      July 2, 2012 at 4:17 PM

      My heart really goes out to you. The marketing of the American church has destroyed what is meant to be the true Church in this country. It is business and if the church happens to big, then it is BIG business.

      My father is a retired pastor. He was never famous. He never counted heads or pushed an agenda. He still loves the Lord with all his heart, soul, mind and strength.

      I think more people need to seek out those churches that are pastor’d by men of God who are unwilling to sell out their God’s truth. Maybe there is less temptation of recognition and goods in the smaller church. I hope you find a new home to worship!

      (I have a bone to pick with pastors that teach the remarriage thing too, because I have seen serial marry’ers fostering the cycle of marriage, adultery, remarriage. It is infuriating.)

      I pray that God will be the extreme comfort and healer to you and your children!

  25. marilyn
    June 12, 2012 at 6:38 AM

    Terry, how heartbreaking to read your story. If what has happened to you at NP doesn’t pierce the heart and minds of those defending Andy, then nothing will. Their minds are seared as with a hot iron! However, the Lord loves those who are obedient. He loves you because you abide in Him. You cannot pick and choose the commands you want to abide in. We are all on this journey of transformation. It is unacceptable to defend our positions. We should be vacating our positions to draw closer to the Lord. Bless you for doing the very hard thing. Bless others like you who are willing to take all of scripture as their personal Truth.
    We attended NP for 5 years. I volunteered there for 5 years and I served as a Ministry Team Representative for the last year and a half. It was a joke. Andy SUPPOSEDLY wanted a sounding board (his words). No… he wanted to surround himself with “yes” people who would support his own path. It’s called “rule by your own authority” in scripture and the outcome is not pretty according to YHWH. I contacted Andy a couple of times yet he would not respond, even though I was APPOINTED to this team. All this to say, we are seeing prophecy unfolding. We are witnessing the apostasy of the last days. The sheep go along because they do not know the voice of The Shepherd. The only way to know that voice is to be fed by His Holy Spirit (not man, not a guy on a stage) and to submit to the words of scripture. NP does not and will not. They believe they have the freedom to “tweek” what they don’t agree with. HMMM…. I know my God. I know Him because I immerse myself in His Word. I cannot think of one story where God told us to do it a certain way and then He decided He liked our way better. In fact, sometimes I’m quite sure we are not reading the same bible!
    Terry, I’ll be praying for you. Sometimes we ache for the justice that will one day be a reality. Set that aside and allow His Spirit to heal you. He will. He will also hand out justice. But in the meantime, He will so transform your life that you will be able to look back and count this a blessing (doesn’t seem so now). I’ve been reading, rereading, and rereading the book of Acts. It’s the model for “church”. We look nothing like it in this generation, no power, no boldness, no miracles. But there is a remnant like you who are willing to stand up! May you be emboldened even more!

  26. Shelley
    July 7, 2012 at 7:23 PM

    I started attending one of Andy Stanley’s strategic partners several years ago. You know they call Andy’s churches “the church for the unchurched”. I was raised in an independent baptist church that blasted sin on a regular basis. The independent baptist church took an extreme stance on “certain” sins like homosexuality, adultery, murder, etc. As a result, for the most part, our church did not attract or accept people that had participated in those extreme sins. My problem with that is doesn’t Jesus love homosexuals? Doesn’t Jesus love adulterers? Of course He does. He loves the person and hates the sin. If your church isn’t focused on reaching those type of people, are they not defeating God’s purpose. My experience with Andy’s church is that they are always going after the “lost sheep”, which is what Jesus has called us to do. If all churches take extreme stances and blatantly condemn homosexuals, adulterers, etc., isn’t it a given that those people will never be reached? I don’t know about you, but I know homosexuals and adulterers that I would like to see in Heaven. But how will they get there if the church slams the door in their face? Andy draws people into his churches AS THEY ARE and then I have watched God transform those people into His likeness.

    And to the lady whose husband terribly hurt her. I am totally in touch and can relate with the pain you feel, but I can’t think of a better place for your husband or any other type of sinner to be than Andy Stanley’s church. I know first hand that Andy’s messages lead you to the right answer. Andy gives the sinner all the information they need to do the right thing in their life. Andy spoon feeds the Bible to every person that walks in the door of his churches. Not only that, but I have found him to be the best communicator I have ever encountered. When Andy tells Bible stories, I feel like I was there when it happened. I’ve watched Andy give the sinner the information that they would not have gotten had the door been slammed in their face, and then I’ve watched God convict and transform that person they need to be. Isn’t that what all churches should be doing?

    • Voice of Reason
      August 5, 2012 at 10:20 PM

      I wish people would stop claiming that sinners are “lost sheep”. Maybe if you people actually read the Bible in its correction context, you’d know that the lost sheep pertain to the tribes of Israel scattered abroad – Mt. 15:24.

      Jesus came for Israel. End of story. He didn’t die for you so you wouldn’t burn in a fictional Hell for eternity because you sassed your parents once.

      Modern Christianity is based on tradition – not Biblical teachings. As for Andy Stanley … he’s a business man, like his father, and should just get it over with and run for Congress if he is going to remain silent about anything controversial.

      Andy Stanley is one reason why I don’t go to church anymore. I’m tired of that self-centered clown insulting my intelligence.

  27. Kyle
    August 6, 2012 at 8:29 PM

    So by your logic, all sinners should be barred from hosting life groups? We’re all flawed people and we’ve all sinned and we all fall short of the glory of God. If we followed your principles, only the self-righteous like yourself could lead life groups.

    • August 6, 2012 at 8:47 PM


      Thanks for reading and taking the time to ask your question. There is no question that we have all sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Even as born-again believers, there is not a day that goes by that we do not sin in some way. So, to answer your question, no all sinners should not be barred from hosting life groups. However, those who are struggling with unrepentant sin — meaning that they are currently engaged in open sin without any intention of confessing and turning from that sin, then yes, they should be barred from leading a Life Group, teaching a Sunday school class, or preaching behind a pulpit. Some sins are so egregious that they would disqualify a man from serving as a pastor or deacon. If you think that I am self-righteous, you misunderstand where I am coming from. But, just to make sure that I don’t misunderstand where you’re coming from, are there any sins which, if currently practiced without any repentance, would preclude someone from serving in the church? You can name them, but it is not necessary. If your answer is no, then we probably have a different idea of Biblical Christianity that cannot be reconciled. Thanks for taking the time to comment tonight. God bless,


  28. Bill Standard
    August 8, 2012 at 2:51 PM

    It is so sad to read the comments on this board. They are so inacurate and twisted and the enamy is clearly gaining ground. In the sermon that got all of this twisted Andy was crystal clear in not dealing with the homosexuality issue because he knew people would become fixated on that. He stuck with the sin that people are more comfortable talking about and it was powerful. I have been at Northpoint since its beginning and NPCC has done more to advance the gospel than any church in the last 20 years. Listen to the baptism stories week after week after week and you will be humbled by the life change that is occuring by the thousands who have given their lives to Christ and it never would have happened if Andy were not open to the prompting of the holy spirit when he speaks.

    • August 8, 2012 at 4:10 PM


      I appreciate you reading and taking the time to share your personal experiences with Andy Stanley and Northpoint. I think the issue is that Andy was NOT crystal clear in how he dealt with this whole situation. The illustration, even if not intended to discuss the sin of homosexuality, was confusing at best. There have been members of NPCC who were confused about the illustration and asked for clarification. I fully understand that Andy Stanley owes me (or any other person not a member of NPCC) no explanation whatsoever. I continue to be perplexed by Andy Stanley’s reticence to offer clarification to members of NPCC who have asked (apart from listening to the entire series). Of course, that is his right and however he wants to deal with this with his congregation at Northpoint is his perogative. Thanks again for stopping by. God bless,


      • Stuart
        March 26, 2013 at 6:55 PM

        I have to interject this once again. I believe that Andy’s sermon was intentionally crafted to do what it accomplished. The story that he told about the homosexual couple and the acceptance by their family was a beautiful illustration of grace, which was the the sermon topic. The irony of all of this was that the sermon had nothing to do with homosexuality, yet that is what people focused on. This sermon on grace showed how much ungrace “christians” have toward that sin. The demonstration of this ungrace was perhaps shown the most right here in this blog as I read some of the attacks on Andy. To be honest, the joke is on all of you who made a big deal about it (homosexuality) and “demanded” an explanation from Andy.

        • March 27, 2013 at 7:45 PM

          Dr. Coe,

          Sorry for the delay in responding, but I was in the hospital for a few days following an appendectomy on Sunday. Not the ideal way to spend my Palm Sunday. I reread my comment to which you are replying. We will continue to “agree to disagree” as to whether the sermon in question “had nothing to do with homosexuality.” You and I, along with countless others, will not be able to come to the same conclusion on this one. That’s okay. We don’t always have to agree on everything 🙂 I hope you have a wonderful Holy Week and a Blessed Easter! God bless,


    • Tibor3 Breining
      August 10, 2012 at 11:27 AM

      Bill, it is not sad.

      1. God saves, not how we do church. But God does tell us how to do church and allowing members with unrepentant sin to serve is just not the way. However, God saves, so if He choses to save sinners exposed to bad church or good church, that is his choice.

      2. Sermons should not be geared to be “more comfortable”.

      3. While I am not agreeing with you that NPCC did more than any church to advance the Gospel, I do want to point something out. Your argument sounds like an “outweigh your bad with your good” argument. I do agree that every church makes mistakes, but their leaders should recognize or defend (if it’s not a mistake) these.

      I listened to Andy Stanley sermons for years, so I’m not an outsider. I do agree that he’s a superb communicator. We need to pray for our pastors.

      With love,
      Tibor3 (there are 3 of us, I’m the youngest)

  29. Sue Thompson
    September 23, 2012 at 12:43 PM

    It is not Andy’s job to get the sinner to stop sinning, his job is to present the gospel of Jesus! Too many churchs spent way too much time wagging their fingers and calling out all the sin, lots of law! It is. It that people don’t know they are sinning, it is that they/we don’t always want or are not ready to stop. So what is the point of keeping them out of a place vy our law, shame, guilt etc so they/we can’t hear a message of truth? Andy too is just a man living for Christ and I believe, doing what the spirit leads him to day to day. We can not know how he is being led. If we spent as much time reaching out to those that are hurting, lost, sinning, questioning etc as we do judging and condemning all that is taking place in the church, how many more could feel loved, cherished etc and feel the need for a Savior. I think Andy does a great job of telling truth but also letting those that arent Christians feel welcome too. He always says, if you are not a Christian than these principals don’t apply to you.
    I worked at a mega church for many years in the accounting dept and I can tell you that is NOT the sole purpose for getting people to come or for writing messages. Why is it when anyone else asks for money from us we are ok with that but the church has to walk around on egg shells when it comes to money. How are bills to be paid? The NP satellite we attend is debt free, not living beyond our means or expanding unnecessarily, how many organizations or people can say that?! Don’t let the lives of some MEN who run churches ruin the gospel of Christ! Let’s stand united under the truth of the gospel and not spend so much time chastising the church as Satan would LOVE for us to waste our time doing! I bet he is having a hayday on all the time that is being wastes here on this topic when we don’t even have any idea on what Andy’s personal feelings are about it what difference does it really make? If you are that upset about this what will it be next at the next church you go to?

  30. Bitsy
    September 30, 2012 at 9:16 AM

    Why do people quote the old testament? That law is no longer valid. The New Testaments says that it replaces the old jewish law morons.

  31. October 13, 2012 at 10:43 PM

    Andy Stanley’s Soft Landing on Homosexuality; Andy is interested in avoiding the controversy of Sin; for the Sake of “his group” rather than Pointing out what Jesus Christ did for people Souls Sake!!! Thank God we do not Go to this group!!! We love the Grace of the Living God that saved us from Sins by His Holy Son Jesus Christ!

  32. Kevin
    December 11, 2012 at 2:53 PM

    i watched from the 24:00 mark until the end and did not hear the illustration of which you speak. Did i miss it? Part 5? It talks about grace and truth, but nothing about the illustration you mentioned.

  33. Allison
    December 30, 2012 at 1:15 AM

    What I am noticing in the majority of these posts is that very few attend North Point or any of its satellite churches.
    I am a member of Browns Bridge Community Church. I originally began attending the North Point campus. I often wondered what the church’s standing was on homosexuality.
    What I have learned from this series and several other sermons of Andy’s is that the church does not allow anyone to serve if they are involved in homosexuality. Plain & simple.
    Watching a video online is completely different than attending in person. There is SO much more to this ministry than what you see on a screen. Yes, it may be a large mega church. It’s not the church for everyone. It won’t appeal to everyone. It’s not supposed to. The sole purpose is to lead people into a growing relationship with Jesus Christ. The church is not about Andy Stanley. it is not Andy’s church. He happens to be the religious leader.
    Instead of tearing a minister apart, why not focus on what YOU have to offer. How are YOU using your gifts that God gave you?

  34. Dan
    January 27, 2013 at 1:47 AM

    It looks like the anecdote has been edited out of the audio and video versions of the controversial sermon.

  35. Lew
    December 28, 2014 at 8:54 AM

    Like Andy clearly said. Jesus loves a homosexual person as much as he loves you, me or Andy Stanley. Jesus call me to love people that aren’t loveable in my eyes because God choose to love me in the same condition. As a result my capacity to love has increased and I’m able to see God’s that thankfully God’s way are different than mine.

  36. Gary Atkinson
    January 3, 2015 at 9:03 AM

    WoW! I shake my head @ Andy tell me where to go to read your doctrine statement on grace & truth send to: please

  37. Dee
    April 26, 2016 at 5:13 AM

    Let the Bible speak for us on this issue:
    1st Cor. 5:11 – But now I have written to you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one not to eat.

    If a pastor teaches contrary to the clear teaching of God’s word, he is a false preacher. In these last days, there will be many false teachers.

    2nd Peter 2:1 – But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

    Christians would do well to study their Bible for themselves today, else they be led astray by false teachers. Nothing says we are in the last days more than fals preaching being so prevalent as it is today.

Leave a Reply