BASKING RIDGE, N.J. CENSORS SPEECH: U.S. TOWN BANS RESIDENTS FROM CRITICIZING MOSQUE

 https://world.wng.org/sites/default/files/field/image/Basking%20Ridge%20mosque_w.jpg
BASKING RIDGE, N.J.: U.S. TOWN BANS RESIDENTS FROM CRITICIZING MOSQUE
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 
A
New Jersey township that was sued by Muslims for refusing to approve a
massive mosque project is returning to court because of a settlement
agreement that restricts speech regarding Islam.
The
settlement required the township to hold a public meeting about the
mosque project, but it forbade anyone from commenting on “Islam” or
“Muslims.”
A
key tenet of Shariah, the Muslim law that governs both personal and
political life, bans any negative comments about Islam or Muslims.
According to the Thomas More Law Center, which
sued the township on behalf of two residents whose home is within 200
feet of the proposed mega-mosque, the settlement with Bernards Township
“reads more like an instrument of surrender.”
The Islamic
Society of Basking Ridge sued and won a decision in federal court after
its mosque proposal was rejected based on traffic and other concerns.
The Township agreed on a $3.5 million payment and a “public hearing to approve the settlement.”
Residents
Christopher and Loretta Quick challenged the agreement in court,
arguing it restricts speech and violates the Establishment Clause by
preferring Islam over other religions.
“The
Quicks reside within 200 feet of the proposed mosque construction in a
zoned residential area,” Thomas More explained. “Yet, the settlement
agreement prohibits them from describing the many unique features of
Islamic worship which will impact design of the building, traffic
density, water and sewage, traffic control problems, road construction,
and parking arrangements. According to the settlement agreement, ISBR is
permitted to make statements concerning Christians and Jews and their
places of worship, but in contrast, the agreement prohibits commentary
relating to Islam or Muslims. In fact, ISBR has previously discussed the
Christian and Jewish religions and their places of worship.”
Richard
Thompson, chief counsel for Thomas More, said the Islamic center “has
taken the extraordinary step of concealing significant links on their
website to a radical group named by the federal government as an
unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism financing trial in
America history, the Islamic Society of North America (‘ISNA’).”
“ISNA
is claimed by the Muslim Brotherhood as one of ‘our organizations.’
According to internal documents seized by the FBI, the Muslim
Brotherhood’s strategy is to engage in a ‘grand jihad in eliminating and
destroying Western civilization from within,’” said Thompson.
He
said that while “claiming that the township had a religious animus
against Muslims, ISBR hid from the public view its animus toward
Christians and Jews, by not only hiding anti-Christian and anti-Semitic
verses published on its website, but also hiding its significant ties to
ISNA.”
“Instead
of standing up to defend its citizens against ISBR’s hate-filled
anti-Semitic and anti-Christian bias, the township colluded with ISBR’s
‘Civilization Jihad’ by capitulating to payment of millions of dollars
to ISBR, allowing the construction of the new mosque and Islamic center
in violation of zoning codes, and now even suppressing speech concerning
Islam or Muslims at a public meeting,” Thompson said.
IslamThreat.com
estimates there were nearly 3,200 mosques in the United States as of
2015, with a massive surge following the 9/11 terror attack by Muslims.
The website lists 525 mosques in California, 507 in New York, 302 in Texas, 200 in Illinois and 186 in Florida.
The
Islamic center sued the township when officials refused to permit a
huge project on a lot critics contend is far too small. Later, U.S.
Department of Justice, then under Barack Obama, also sued the township.
The new complaint argues the First Amendment provides no open door for governments to issue blanket censorship orders on speech.
“Defendants
… have put in place a prior restraint on speech that bans citizens from
engaging in free speech at a public hearing on political matters
because of the content,” the complaint asserts.
“The settlement agreement further allows defendants to forbid speech with which they or others disagree.”
Further,
the fact that the agreement doesn’t provide the same protections to
Christians, Jews and others means that “defendants have shown preference
for Islam and Muslims over other religions.”
The
complaint seeks a declaration that the residents’ constitutional rights
are being violated, preliminary and permanent injunctions against the
agreement, and damages.
WND reported earlier this year citizens fought back after the personal communications of critics of the Basking Ridge project were subpoenaed in the case.
Neighborhood
residents, including Lori Caratzola, were named by ISBR in its lawsuit
as a fervent opponent of the mosque. Caratzola faced demands for all of
her personal communications that mention Muslims, Islam, mosques, the
Quran, imams, burkas, hijabs, Shariah, jihad and other features of
Islam.
“ISBR
is setting a dangerous unconstitutional precedent by abusing a court
process to chill and trample on the First Amendment rights of private
citizens whose only involvement was to speak out against the mosque at
public hearings,” Thompson said at the time.
He
asked for the subpoenas to be thrown out “because the U.S. Supreme
Court has held that speech at a public place on a matter of public
concern is entitled to special protection.”
Caratzola
charged the Muslims’ intent with her was “to embarrass, strike fear,
silence and cause financial harm to any citizen who dared oppose his
nonconforming project.”


SUZANNE HUMPHRIES: THE REAL REASON ALUMINUM IS IN VACCINES!

SUZANNE HUMPHRIES: 
THE REAL REASON ALUMINUM IS IN VACCINES! 
 So, vaccines do boost the immune system, at least one branch of it
versus another, depending on what kind of a vaccine. I don’t paint all
vaccines with the same brush because live vaccines are different than
killed vaccines, and there are different kinds of both. So, if you were
to inject a baby with a DTaP vaccine, that baby’s immune system wouldn’t
do very much, so they have to put aluminum into the vaccine for that
baby to respond. And that’s why aluminum was put into the vaccines,
because when it comes to these sub-unit or killed vaccines the infant
immune system just won’t respond to it.
 

EX JUDGE ROY MOORE: HAMAS LINKED “CAIR” ENRAGED AS ALABAMA SENATE CANDIDATE CALLS ISLAM A “FALSE RELIGION”

 http://yellowhammernews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Khaula-Hadeed.jpg
 http://tennesseestar.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/JudgeRoyMoore.jpg
EX JUDGE ROY MOORE: HAMAS LINKED “CAIR” ENRAGED AS ALABAMA SENATE CANDIDATE CALLS ISLAM A “FALSE RELIGION” 
BY ROBERT SPENCER
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 

Khaula Hadeed of Hamas-linked CAIR said it was “un-American” to say Islam was a “false religion.”

So apparently now you have to believe that Islam is true in order to be an American.

Certainly there are plenty of Americans who seem to assume that — witness the cancellation of atheist Richard Dawkins last week for criticizing Islam.

“Roy Moore ‘un-American’ for calling Islam a ‘false religion,’ Alabama Muslims say,” by Howard Koplowitz, Al.com, July 25, 2017:

Roy Moore’s remarks last night calling Islam a “false
religion” was “un-American” speech, the Alabama chapter of a Muslim
civil liberties organization said Tuesday.

The Alabama chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations also
extended an invitation to the former Alabama Supreme Court chief
justice and U.S. Senate candidate to visit a mosque following his
comments.

Moore made the statement in response to a question at the North
Jefferson County Republican Club about concerns that Sharia law could be
implemented in the United States.

“False religions like Islam, who teach that ‘you must worship this
way,’ are completely opposite with what our First Amendment stands for,”
Moore said during a the club’s meeting Monday night at Jim ‘N Nick’s
BBQ in Gardendale.

Khaula Hadeed, executive director of CAIR-Alabama, released a
statement Tuesday afternoon inviting Moore to visit a mosque during his
Senate campaign. She cited a verse from the Quran that she said called
on the religion’s followers to respond to hurtful acts with kindness.

“Statements that espouse Islamophobia and cast out fellow Alabamians,
implying that they do not have the same rights under the law, are
unAmerican,” said CAIR-Alabama Executive Director Khaula Hadeed in a
statement. “We invite Judge Roy Moore to visit a mosque, meet with
Alabamian Muslims, and learn about their Islamic faith and about the
Muslim constituents he intends to serve as a representative. As a
candidate for Senate, this is perhaps the best time for him to do so.”…

TRUMP THREATENS TO CUT OFF INSURANCE COMPANY SUBSIDIES AFTER OBAMACARE REPEAL VOTE FAILS

TRUMP THREATENS TO CUT OFF INSURANCE COMPANY SUBSIDIES AFTER OBAMACARE REPEAL VOTE FAILS
BY BOB ADELMANN
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 

Sounding rather testy that the Senate didn’t give him what he wanted on Thursday, President Trump tweeted on Saturday morning
that he would not only punish senators and their staffs but cut off the
government funding of subsidies — estimated to be $8 billion — to
hungry insurance companies.
He tweeted: “After seven years of ‘talking’
Repeal & Replace, the people of our great country are still being
forced to live with imploding ObamaCare!” He then tweeted the
not-so-subtle threat:

If a new HealthCare bill is not approved
quickly, BAILOUTS for Insurance Companies and BAILOUTS for Members of
Congress will end very soon!

He added verbal insult to the potential financial injury:

Unless the Republican Senators are total
quitters, Repeal & Replace is not dead. Demand another vote before
voting on any other bill!

The president has threatened to cut off those federal subsidies
before, but paid them in June and July. Now, however, with the August
payment in jeopardy, health insurance companies are estimating that they
will be forced to raise premiums immediately by at least 20 percent. In
addition, Trump wants to abrogate the agreement wrought in 2010,
putting congressional staffs under ObamaCare, just like everyone else.
If he holds true to his tweet, Trump will turn off both spigots unless
the Senate bends to his will and votes on R&R next week before
taking their August recess.

This sounds very much like the commissar of a slave labor camp who,
tired of complaints, issues the threat: “Beatings will continue until
morale improves.”

Democrats were quick to respond, defending territory that their
president won over the protests of a large majority of Americans back in
2009 who loudly and repeatedly declared that they didn’t want
government-financed healthcare. Said their chief Senate spokesman,
Senator Charles Schumer of New York, on Saturday:

If the president refuses to make the
cost-sharing reduction payments, every expert agrees that premiums will
go up and health care will be more expensive for millions of Americans.
The president ought to stop playing politics with people’s lives and
health care, start leading and finally begin acting presidential.

The “skinny” repeal of the odious, expensive, and unconstitutional
ObamaCare program failed when three so-called Republicans — one of them
getting out of his hospital bed to do so — voted against it. Leading the
pack of RINOs was Senator John McCain from Arizona along with Senators
Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.

Their voting records reflect a near-total lack of concern over
keeping their oaths of office to protect and defend the Constitution.
The Freedom Index (FI), which rates votes by members of Congress on
their adherence to the Constitution, for them is 63 percent, 40 percent,
and 48 percent, respectively.

But they don’t share the blame alone. Masters of political statecraft
and closed-door maneuvering who spelled doom to Trump’s hopes include
House Speaker Paul Ryan (FI: 58 percent) and Senator Majority Leader
Mitch McConnell (FI: 60 percent).

Another person to blame is Supreme Court Justice John Roberts, who
voted to uphold the individual mandate out of conviction that his court
must not be responsible for ending the healthcare takeover. Still others
are those in the Republican Party who voted more than half-a-dozen
times to repeal ObamaCare when it was safe to do so, for political
points, but were totally unwilling to keep that promise when Trump
unexpectedly won the White House in November. They “badly
underestimated,” wrote Jonathan Tobin of National Review, “how
hard it would be to do something that no party has ever been able to
accomplish: roll back an entitlement.” Once addicted to the new program,
resistance began to fade as those newcomers were now covered with
healthcare at the expense of their neighbors. Current polls are showing
only 29 percent interested in repeal, with the vast majority wanting
Congress to move on to other things.”

According to Tobin, most of the blame can be placed on President Trump. He explains in his recent National Review
article that Obama “had little respect for Congress or interest in the
normal forms of friendly persuasion that involve entertaining and
back-scratching. But he proved that a president could have neither the
charm of Ronald Reagan nor the penchant for raw political thuggery of
Lyndon Johnson and still have the ability to force dysfunctional
congressional majorities to give him what he wanted.”

Translation: Obama knew exactly what he wanted. Either a full-on
single-payer health care system that would put the remainder of what was
left of the country’s quasi-free market system under total government
control, or a program that was designed to fail that would lead to the
same end. In other words, Obama was an ideologue — a socialist/Marxist
ideologue — and knew exactly what he wanted and wouldn’t quit until he
(with the assistance of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi) got it.

Trump, on the other hand, is about as far from being an ideologue as
one can imagine. He’s a deal-maker, willing to give up certain chips in
order to gain others. There is no “right” or “wrong” over ObamaCare,
just a “right” versus “left” that currently is getting in his way. He
and his staff need to reduce the impact of ObamaCare in order to
generate enough savings to offset the massive deficits in his proposed
budget. That is his target, and getting something done over healthcare
was merely a steppingstone to it.

Lost in all the shuffle is a surprising piece of proposed legislation
that has generated almost no attention: a bill that would have, in two
simple sentences, utterly and completely repealed ObamaCare once and for
all. No footnotes, no addendas, no “revisions” or “replacements” — just
straight repeal. From Representative Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) came this back
in March:

This Act may be cited as the “ObamaCare Repeal Act.”
Effective as of Dec. 31, 2017 the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act is repealed, and the provisions of
law amended or repealed by such Act are restored or revived as if such
Act had not been enacted.

Neat and tidy. Simple. Effective. And all but totally ignored by
Republicans more enamored with their popularity going into the next
election than with doing the right thing. Brooks couldn’t even generate
enough support for his bill to get it out of committee. He touched on
the real problem about repealing ObamaCare: Neither the people nor their
representatives want to touch it. “If the American people want to
repeal ObamaCare,” said Brooks, “this is their last, best chance during
the 115th Congress. Those Congressmen who are sincere about repealing
ObamaCare may prove it by signing the discharge petition.”

The silence following his plea was deafening.

Related article:
RINOs Stop ObamaCare Repeal in Senate, but Fight Continues

TRUMP’S SATURDAY RAMPAGE~UNLOADS ON REPUBLICANS AFTER HEALTHCARE BILL FAIL

Saturday Rampage: Trump Unloads on Republicans After Healthcare Bill Fail

Calls for 51 majority vote change to Senate rules, threatens Congress’ healthcare options

BY ADAN SALAZAR

SEE: https://www.infowars.com/saturday-rampage-trump-unloads-on-republicans-after-healthcare-bill-fail/

 President Donald Trump on Saturday let everyone, especially
purported members of his own party, know he’s not happy with the recent
failed healthcare repeal vote.

 
 

In a lengthy tweet screed, the president lashed out against “foolish”
Republican leadership for failing to pass a “skinny” repeal bill, and
urged the passage of a simple 51 majority vote rule.

Transcript of the tweets below:

“Republican
Senate must get rid of 60 vote NOW! It is killing the R Party, allows 8
Dems to control country. 200 Bills sit in Senate. A JOKE!”
“The
very outdated filibuster rule must go. Budget reconciliation is killing
R’s in Senate. Mitch M, go to 51 Votes NOW and WIN. IT’S TIME!”
“Republicans
in the Senate will NEVER win if they don’t go to a 51 vote majority
NOW. They look like fools and are just wasting time……”
“….8 Dems
totally control the U.S. Senate. Many great Republican bills will never
pass, like Kate’s Law and complete Healthcare. Get smart!”
“If the
Senate Democrats ever got the chance, they would switch to a 51
majority vote in first minute. They are laughing at R’s. MAKE CHANGE!”
“After
seven years of “talking” Repeal & Replace, the people of our great
country are still being forced to live with imploding ObamaCare!”

The
president also threatened congress members’ healthcare options if a
successful repeal could not be agreed upon, and later questioned whether
Republicans were “total quitters” for refusing to pursue the effort.
“If
a new HealthCare Bill is not approved quickly, BAILOUTS for Insurance
Companies and BAILOUTS for Members of Congress will end very soon!”
“Unless
the Republican Senators are total quitters, Repeal & Replace is not
dead! Demand another vote before voting on any other bill!”

Friday’s
vote was voted down 49-51, with many blaming Arizona Sen. John McCain
for casting the deciding vote which doomed the repeal.

MAYOR DEFIES ATHEIST GROUP’S DEMANDS, VOWS TO KEEP BIBLE VERSE ON COURTHOUSE WALL

MAYOR DEFIES ATHEIST GROUP’S DEMANDS, VOWS TO KEEP BIBLE VERSE ON COURTHOUSE WALL
BY GARRETT HALEY
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 

HENDERSON COUNTY, Tenn. – After receiving a
complaint letter from a prominent atheist group, the mayor of a
Tennessee county says he has no plans to remove a Bible verse
inscription from his county’s courthouse and hopes instead to add an
additional verse to the building’s walls.

On June 30, attorney Rebecca Markert with the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) mailed a letter
to Dan Hughes, mayor of Henderson County in Tennessee. She said that a
“concerned local resident” told FFRF about a biblical inscription on the
cornerstone of the county courthouse.

“We understand that a Bible verse is etched on the wall of the
Henderson County Courthouse in Lexington, Tennessee,” Markert wrote.
“The verse reads, ‘Justice and judgment are the habitation of thy
throne: Mercy and truth shall go before thy face. Psalms 89:14.’”

Arguing that the scriptural inscription violates the U.S.
Constitution’s Establishment Clause, Markert said the verse on the
courthouse is “inappropriate” because “it conveys government support for
religion.”

“The context of the religious message is particularly problematic,”
she added. “The verse alludes to the throne of a Judeo-Christian god,
and it is embedded into the walls of the courthouse, the seat of
government. This perpetuates the myth that our law is based on biblical
principles, and it sends the message to private citizens with business
at the courthouse that the justice they seek will be decided based on
religion.”

Markert concluded the letter by urging Hughes to remove the verse from the courthouse wall “as soon as possible.”

However, Hughes said he was surprised that anyone would take issue
with the Bible verse and advised that he has no plans to remove the
inscription, which has reportedly been on the courthouse cornerstone for
more than 50 years.

“I wasn’t expecting anything and had not been contacted about the
verse or really believed half the people in county even know the verse
is on that side of the cornerstone,” Hughes told WBBJ.

In his reply to FFRF, Hughes noted that most residents of Henderson County believe in God.

“Our community is based on the belief of a true and living God,” he wrote.

Hughes told WBBJ that he has received nothing but positive feedback
regarding his decision. Furthemore, he said he hopes to add an
additional verse to the courthouse: Psalm 33:12. That verse says,
“Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD: and the people whom he
hath chosen for his own inheritance.”

Local residents interviewed by WBBJ said they were glad their mayor didn’t capitulate to the atheist group’s demands.

“It ought to stay right there,” said Henderson County resident John
Huffman. “If somebody else wants something different, they’ll chisel it
on there. There’s plenty of squares.”

“It’s a big Bible Belt around here, and you know, if they don’t like
it, they don’t have to read it,” Henderson County resident Adam Pinte
opined.

“Well, it’s on the back of your dollar bill too, but nobody complains when they spend their money,” Pinte added.

FFRF released a statement
on Wednesday saying they were “alarmed” by the mayor’s decision to
retain the biblical engraving and “shocked by such an explicit
endorsement of Christianity.” FFRF co-presidents Annie Laurie Gaylor and
Dan Barker mailed a response letter to Hughes, urging him to reconsider his decision.

However, Danny Sorrell, pastor of Campbell Street Church of Christ in
Jackson, Tennessee, said biblical principles played an important role
in the founding of the U.S., so biblical inscriptions on government
buildings are constitutional.

“Our country was founded on a Christian heritage, and there’s so much
that we can gain from and learn from our past and learn from God’s
word,” Sorrell told WBBJ.

“Having a Bible verse on the courthouse, that’s not imposing anyone’s
religion on anyone else,” he added. “It’s just part of the history of
our country.”

WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES AGAIN DEFENDS PALESTINIAN JIHADISTS OVER ISRAEL

WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES AGAIN DEFENDS PALESTINIAN JIHADISTS OVER ISRAEL
BY CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 

A Christian organization — the European Coalition for Israel —
“blasted international Christian institutions for blaming Israel for the
recent Temple Mount tensions.” In a statement issued by the World
Council of Churches:


Secretary-General Olav Fykse Tveit called upon the
Israeli government to immediately remove the metal detectors, thereby
putting the blame for the latest wave of violence on Israeli security
measures and not on the Palestinian incitement to violence.

A Jewish human rights group — the Simon Wiesenthal Center — condemned the WCC, stating (as Hugh Fitzgerald details here) that the installation of metal detectors is routine at religious sites globally:

In 2015, Saudi Arabia introduced a range of new
restrictions, including electronic bracelets, for Muslims performing the
Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca after capturing a suicide bomber who planned
to attack the Grand Mosque in Islam’s holiest city. Major Christian
sites, most obviously at the Vatican in Rome, have also implemented
enhanced measures amid a continuing wave of Islamist terror attacks in
Europe and the Middle East.

The World Council of Churches has a reputation for condemning Israel
and enabling the Palestinian jihad. A few years ago, the WCC demanded
that Israel release jihad terrorists, and has dedicated events to ending the so-called “illegal occupation.”

“EUROPEAN COALITION FOR ISRAEL: CHRISTIAN GROUPS BIASED AGAINST ISRAEL”, by Benjamin Glatt, Jerusalem Post, July 25, 2017:

A Christian organization promoting Israeli-European
cooperation blasted international Christian institutions for blaming
Israel for the recent Temple Mount tensions.

“It is simply wrong to blame the Israeli government for wanting to
protect those entering the Temple Mount after the recent killings,”
European Coalition for Israel Founding Director Tomas Sandell said
Monday night. “Metal detectors are today a part of standard security
procedures at holy sites in the world, from the Vatican to Mecca. These
measures are put in place simply in order to protect people and are not
meant to deny anyone access.”

Sandell’s remarks came in wake of various statements from Christian
institutions around the world, including the Vatican and the World
Council of Churches in Geneva, pleading for calm and asking Israel to
stop inciting to violence.

In a statement from WCC on Friday, Secretary-General Olav Fykse Tveit
called upon the Israeli government to immediately remove the metal
detectors, thereby putting the blame for the latest wave of violence on
Israeli security measures and not on the Palestinian incitement to
violence.

The Geneva-based organization, which is said to represent millions of
Protestant Christians, has a long history of anti-Israel bias.

Recently, WCC published on its website a statement from its member
churches in the Palestinian territories in which the Balfour Declaration
of 1917 was described as “unlawful” and “marking 100 years of
oppression,” thus rejecting any rights for the Jewish people to live in
their own state in their ancestral homeland. These rights, Sandell said,
were clearly established under international law in San Remo already in
1920. The Palestinian churches further urged WCC to step up efforts to
boycott Israel, which it calls “a colonial apartheid state.”

The European Coalition for Israel also noted that event though WCC
has been very outspoken about the Israeli-Arab conflict in the past, the
organization hasn’t issued any statements on the recent UNESCO
resolutions that denied any Jewish or Christian history in the Holy Land
by declaring heritage sites, such as the Tomb of the Patriarchs, the
Temple Mount and the Western Wall, as exclusively Muslim holy sites.

 

REVIEW: ANDY STANLEY’S “DEEP & WIDE”

 https://mgpcpastor.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/deep-and-wide.jpg
Andy Stanley’s Deep and Wide: A Review
BY SETH DUNN
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 
Who is Andy Stanley?

Andy Stanley is the founder and senior pastor of North Point Ministries (NPM), which is an organization that started as a single church (North Point Community Church in Alpharetta, Georgia) in the fall of 1995.[1] 
The organization now boasts six Atlanta-area churches as well as
numerous independent “strategic partner” churches scattered throughout
the United States.[2]  Stanley is the son of former Southern Baptist Convention President Charles Stanley, who is the founder of In Touch Ministries and the long-time pastor of First Baptist Church Atlanta.  The younger Stanley served as an associate pastor at his father’s church before founding NPM.  In Deep and Wide: Creating Churches in Unchurched People Love to Attend,
Andy Stanley shares the story of how he founded his organization and
offers direction on how to create similar “churches which unchurched
people love to attend”.  The book is broken up into five parts, each of
which addresses a part of Stanley’s model.

Endorsements

The most telling part of Stanley’s book comes not from the text itself but from its endorsements page.    Deep and Wide‘s list of endorsers is a who’s who of entrepreneurial seeker-sensitive megachurch pastors
Rick Warren, Bill Hybels, Craig Groeschel, Steven Furtick, Perry Noble,
and Louie Giglio all give the book high praise.  Hybels, the father of the seeker-sensitive movement, famously lamented that his own Willow Creek network of churches was “a mile wide and an inch deep“.  Hybels’ negative assessment of the fruit of seeker-sensitive movement no doubt served as an inspiration for Stanley’s title Deep and Wide.  In the book’s introduction, Andy Stanley writes, “Local Churches should be characterized by deep roots and wide reaches.  Churches should be theologically sound and culturally relevant.”[3] 
Given Stanley’s attitude about church, the identities of his endorsers
should come as no surprise.  Those identities should also serve as a
warning to those who look to Stanley for wisdom.   To be both biblically
educated and informed of the exploits of men like Furtick and Noble
leads one to be wary of them and what they recommend.

Getting All Theological

Andy Stanley’s ministry model rises and falls upon the notion that
churches can be attractive to unchurched people.  From a business
standpoint, Stanley’s notion seems counterintuitive.  It sounds a bit
like opening a burger joint for people who don’t like beef.  However,
Stanley’s model has actually succeeded in growing a brand new church
plant with 708 charter members into a multi-site ministry with thousands
of members and international influence in the span of two decades. 
When Stanley set out to form NPM, he recognized that his geographic market was already saturated with churches that churched
people loved to attend.  “I grew up attending churches designed for
church people,” Stanley writes, “No one said it, but the assumption was
that the church was for church people.  The unspoken message to the
outside world was ‘Once you start believing and behaving like us, you
are welcome to join us’”.[4] 
The Bible Belt resident realized that if he created one more church
“for churched people” then few would be enticed to join it.  So, Stanley
created a business that the Atlanta market did not have, a church for
unchurched people.  Using various tactics, such as playing secular music
to open services, Stanley and his co-laborers have managed to grow
North Point Church into the quasi-denomination North Point MinistriesNPM
grades itself on how attractive it is to its target audience,
unchurched people.  Andy Stanley reveals this metric of success to
readers on page 15 of Deep and Wide.  Anticipating a negative
reaction Stanley writes, “Now, before you go getting all theological on
me and writing us off as a dog-and-pony show, take note: We are a
church.  Our goal isn’t to create an event unchurched people love to attend.  We are creating churches.”[5] 
This phrase shudders the biblically-minded reader to the core.  In
order to explain and defend his idea of what “church” is and how it
should be, Andy Stanley warns readers not to get “theological”. 
Theological is exactly what anyone seeking to lead Christ’s church
should be.  As has been demonstrated by its numerical growth, Andy
Stanley’s method of church management works from a business
perspective.  However, it is theologically untenable and blatantly
unbiblical.

Untenable Ecclesiology

Stanley’s defense of his method is a specious one.  He claims that NPM
is creating “churches”, not “events”, that a certain demographic, the
unchurched, loves to attend.  This claim breaks down when analyzed.  It
is common parlance to ask someone, “Where do you go to church?” or “What
church do you attend?” However, these questions are manners of speaking
meant to determine in what church one holds membership.  Unlike events,
churches are not attended.  Churches are essentially bodies of
believers.   The sentence “I attend a body of believers” is incoherent. 
The sentence “I attend worship services at First Baptist Church” is
not.  That is because churches are bodies of believers which hold
events, most frequently Sunday worship services.  It is truly the Sunday
services of NPM, its events, that are geared towards
unchurched people.  Churches are, by definition, composed of churched
people.  Yet, Stanley creates his own definition of “unchurched”. 
Rather than defining unchurched people as those who are not members of a
body, Stanley defines the unchurched as those “not having attended a
church for five years or longer”.[6]  Here again, Stanley’s presupposition is that church is something that is attended and not an entity in and of itself.  What Stanley’s philosophy boils down to is another absurd statement: The goal of NPM is to create churches of which unchurched people love to be a part.

But oil and water don’t mix.  The church of Jesus Christ is a
particular group of people.  This is what the Apostle Peter reminds the
early church in his first epistle:

“Therefore, prepare your minds for action, keep sober in spirit,
fix your hope completely on the grace to be brought to you at the
revelation of Jesus Christ. As obedient children, do not be conformed to
the former lusts which were yours in your ignorance,  but like the Holy One who called you, be holy yourselves also in all your behavior; because it is written, ‘You shall be holy, for I am holy.’” 1 Peter 1:13-16

In the scripture above, Peter quotes a command of God to the nation of Israel recorded
in the book of Leviticus – “Be holy”.  This demonstrates that the New
Testament Church is an extension of Old Testament Israel.  The latter
served as a witness that the Messiah was coming, the former serves as a
witness that the Messiah has come and is soon to come again in
judgment.  In any age, the Israel of God serves as a witness to the
world while maintaining a separation from the world.  In order to serve
as a witness, the church must maintain a unique and separate identity. 
This is what it means to be holy.  The Greek term ἅγιος
used by Peter and translated as “holy” in the scripture above indicates
that the church is to be set apart from everything and everyone that is
not the church.  The church is to be different from the world.  Thus,
it is completely reasonable for a church to expect that people who want
to be a part of it first change the way they believe and behave.  This
expectation is in line with the Christian doctrines of regeneration and sanctification
Once a sinner gets saved, to use commonly understood evangelical
terminology for regeneration, he is indwelt by the Holy Spirit.  Thus
starts the process of sanctification.  At this point the believer starts
to look like the church and, as Peter puts it, should no longer be
conformed to his former lusts.  A true believer isn’t merely attracted to the church, he is the church.  A church that insists that its membership be holy is merely a matter of salt being salty.
Yet, this is off-putting to Andy Stanley.  It is also apparently
off-putting to thousands of other Atlanta-area residents who were raised
in the same church culture as Stanley.  These off-put consumers are
drawn to NPM and the philosophies of its leader, Andy Stanley.  Stanley boldly declares that he “leverages their consumer instincts”[7] and claims that Jesus did the same.

Stanley puts his own spin on what the church is in the second section
of his book.  This is the section in which Stanley attempts to give the
biblical justification for his approach to church.[8] 
In Chapter Three, Stanley gives a very short and lightly footnoted
summary of church history in which he literally anticipates the question
“how long is this chapter in anyway?”[9]  Once again, Stanley is flippant about theology.  Deep and Wide’s chapters which give biblical justification for Stanley’s model of church should arguably be thorough, should arguably be deep
However, Stanley’s pattern is to trade on brief, specious arguments
shrouded in humor, pithiness, or some personal account.  His writing
style is not unlike his preaching style; both lack depth and operate on a
surface level.  His argument in Chapter 3 is dependent on his treatment
of the Greek term ἐκκλησία[10]
which is translated as “church” in almost every English Bible. Stanley
asserts that the word “church” is not a translation of ἐκκλησία but
rather a bad substitution for it.[11]
According to Stanley, the institutionalization of the movement, or
“church”, that Jesus started led to the ἐκκλησία being associated with a
building or a location controlled by an institutional authority.  He
associates the perversion of the Greek term with the machinations of the
Roman Catholic Church and cites the Reformers as those who would be
sympathetic to his view.  This does not, of course, play out in church
history.  The seeker-sensitive movement of Warren, Hybels, Stanley, and
their ilk began hundreds of years after Martin Luther and other
reformers began the task of breaking free from Roman Catholic error and
subjugation.   The seeker-sensitive movement is firmly planted inside of
modern American entrepreneurial pragmatism and is nowhere to be found
in first 400 years after the Reformation began.

Stanley is at least partially correct in his treatment of the term
ἐκκλησία, however.  In Greek culture, the term often referred to a
gathering of people, not necessarily Christian or religious.  Stanley
writes, “An ekklesia was simply a gathering or an assembly of people called out for a specific purpose.  Ekklesia never referred to a specific place, only a specific gathering.”[12] 
This statement is true.  At the same time, it is a straw man.  That
Christ’s church is not a specific location is not the argument of those
churches who would insist that church members believe and behave in a
certain way.  It is a straw man created by Andy Stanley to further his
narrative that church is a movement.  It’s not.  It’s a people.  It’s a
people sanctified (set apart) to God and for God.  No one needs a
dedicated building to be Holy but it’s certainly okay to have one.  Andy
Stanley’s organization has several.

Such buildings are where the church formally gathers for its most
frequent event, Lord’s Day worship.  It is here where Andy Stanley’s
model of church runs into another very serious problem –  the world
doesn’t honor God.  The Bible makes it clear in several places that the
world, those not a part of the church and therefore not currently set apart to and for God, are at enmity with both God and His people.  The Apostle James wrote:

“You ask and do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, so that you may spend it on
your pleasures. You adulteresses, do you not know that friendship
with the world is hostility toward God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a
friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. Or do you think that
the Scripture speaks to no purpose: ‘He jealously desires the Spirit
which He has made to dwell in us’?” James 4:3-5

When God’s people gather on the Lord’s Day to praise God they should
not expect that unbelievers will want to take part in that worship. 
Thus, to gear church services to appeal to a demographic (whether it is
called “lost” or “unchurched”) is to change the focus of the worship
event.  The event ceases to be about appealing to God.  Instead, it
appeals to man.  Not only that, it appeals to the unregenerate man.  The
Apostle Paul wrote:

“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit
the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor
idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves,
nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, e
kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you
were sanctified, but you were “justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.” 1 Corinthians 6:9-11

How can unsanctified people find appeal in a Christ-honoring,
church-edifying worship service?  The same way a goose hatches out of a
chicken egg…it doesn’t.  It’s another absurdity.  Stanley’s method of
church is to essentially water down the message of scripture while
having the people of God cater to “unchurched” people who have no
interesting in serving or worshipping Him in spirit and truth.  Stanley
turns what should be praise songs and preaching into a concert followed
by a motivational speech.  It draws numbers, but not holy ones. 
Stanley’s method not only confuses the nature of the church but perverts
its primary weekly event, the worship service, to a form of worldly
entertainment.  Unchurched people simply don’t love Christ’s church. 
Unchurched people simply don’t love the worship of God.  Thus, a church
that unchurched people love to attend is not a church at all.  It’s akin
to hamburger joint that puts tofu patties between buns, calls them
hamburgers, and serves them to people who don’t like beef.  It does good
business and happily makes thousands of sales…but it doesn’t sell
hamburgers.

A Didactic Problem

Much of the “biblical” justification Stanley gives for his model is
subtlety deceptive.  Among Christians, there is universal agreement that
the church belongs to Christ.  Stanley uses the exploits of Christ, as
chronicled in the Bible, in various places in his book to support his
own assertions.  When he does so, he engages in more specious error. 
Almost never does Stanley appeal to the teaching of the Apostles (as has
been done above to critique his methodology).  This is significant.  It
is essential to understand the biblical context in order to understand
Stanley’s erroneous method of teaching.  The fours gospels often descriptively portray
Jesus as taking some action to teach the reader about whom Jesus is and
what he is doing while the epistles of the Apostles prescriptively
instruct the church. Stanley relies on the former to support his
ecclesiological assumptions where the former are not addressing church
operations.

Stanley rightly points out that “If you want to know what Jesus meant but Jesus said, pay attention to what Jesus did.”[13] 
One thing that Jesus did was to appoint Apostles such as Paul to
oversee the early church.  We find the writings of Peter, Paul, James,
John, and Jude in their numerous epistles, many of which predate the
authoring of the four gospels.  These epistles are written by Apostles,
in many cases to specific churches, in order to instruct the churches on
how they should operate.  In other words, the epistles of the New
Testament instruct churches on how to be churches.  In Deep and Wide Stanley cites the epistle of James thrice (James 1:17, 2:20, and 2:26), the epistles to the Corinthians thrice (1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and 10:26), the epistle to the Romans twice (Romans 8:28 and Romans 12:2), and the second epistle to Timothy once (2 Timothy 3:16). 
Through none of these citations does Stanley make a substantial
argument about the church should operate or behave.  Instead, Stanley
relies on descriptive stories from the gospels.  Indeed, Jesus reached
out to the outcasts of society and challenged the religious authority of
his day.  However, the brotherly love and evangelism demonstrated by
Jesus and his disciples in the gospels do not translate into a church
model where worship services center around appealing to the unchurched
and finding places of service for them.  If readers aren’t careful, they
can get so excited about the praiseworthy exploits of the Lord Jesus
and not notice that Stanley is not applying them in the proper context.

Stanley is adamant that “every church should be a church irreligious people love to attend.”[14] 
This premise can be restated as follows: “every gathering of God’s
people to exercise religious devotion should be a gathering of God’s
people where the religious devotion being exercised is loved by those
who are indifferent or hostile to religion“. 
To defend this absurdity Stanley invokes Jesus.  He writes, “The church
is the local expression of the presence of Jesus.  We are His body. 
And since people who were nothing like Jesus liked Jesus, people who are
nothing like Jesus should like us as well.[15]  This statement does not play out in scripture.

“…Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of
God, and saying, ‘The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at
hand; repent and believe in the gospel.’” Mark 1:14-15

“And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed
to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many
brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom
He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He
also glorified.” Romans 8:28-30

Jesus’ most vociferous critics, scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees, and
teachers of the law, were not like him.  Yes, they were the same ethnically but
spiritually their hearts were far from Him.  Those who accepted Jesus
accepted his offer of forgiveness and were called on to turn (or repent)
from their sins.  In doing so, they could become like him.  Andy
Stanley not only advocates that the church appeal to the world, he
argues that Jesus did so.  Jesus, as history shows, had no friendship
with the world.  Andy Stanley does.  In a jab at his critics, Stanley
writes, “All of my critics are religious people (It may be the only
thing I have in common with Jesus).”[16] 
The churches being critiqued and rebuked by Paul in his many epistles
could have made the same, haughty quip.  In reality, Stanley misapplies
the exploits of Jesus to justify his brand of pragmatic religious
consumerism.  Misapplying Jesus is nothing new.

All About Andy

The first part of the book is dedicated to telling Andy Stanley’s
biographical story.  He grew up in a tense and combative church culture,
one in which his own father was punched in the face during a church
business meeting at First Baptist Atlanta.  It was a fight for his
father to become of the Senior Pastor of First Baptist Atlanta and a
young Andy and his best friend Louie Giglio witnessed it.  After Andy
grew up and went to seminary, he entered the fray and accepted a
position as a student minister at First Baptist Atlanta.  He served in
this capacity for ten years.  Then, almost by accident, he took the
first step to becoming the Senior Pastor of his own church.  First
Baptist Atlanta was determined to move to a more suburban location.  It
obtained access to a piece of property known as “the warehouse” and
opened up a second campus there.  The intention was to move the entire
church to that location; at the time, the multi-site megachurch fad had
yet to become popular.  Stanley was tasked to lead the location until
the move could take place.  However, it was delayed indefinitely.

The real estate market did not provide First Baptist Atlanta with a
feasible environment in which to move in the planned timeframe.  To make
matters worse, the younger Stanley had a falling out with his father
which revolved, in large part, over Charles’s Stanley’s controversial
and very public divorce.  Andy Stanley would eventually resign his
position at First Baptist Atlanta.  However, he retained a very large
following.  He was able parlay his popularity into a new church plant,
no longer operating under the authority of his father’s church but still
well within its shadow.  Stanley was finally free to do things his own
way.  He has.

During his tenure working with youth at First Baptist Atlanta, a
twenty-six-year-old Stanley put on what the deacons of First Baptist
Atlanta deemed an “irreverent and unruly”[17]
youth event in the church building.  Despite a number of decisions for
Christ made by attendees, the deacons were very upset at the spectacle. 
Stanley, ever-pragmatic was aghast at their disgust.  After all, hadn’t
it worked?  Arguably, this experienced helped shape NPM
services into what they are today, seeker-sensitive concerts followed by
motivational speeches that are in some way related to God.  Andy
Stanley turned the youth-concert methodology rejected by the stodgy
deacons at his father’s church and turned it into a church model.  He
then put that church right in their back yard.  If NPM seems more like a rock and roll youth revival than a church, it’s not hard to see why.  NPM
and Andy Stanley are shaped out of a rejection of conservative Southern
Baptist culture.  Unfortunately, they have also come to reject the
biblical expectation for churches.

That Andy Stanley devotes the entire first section of his book to his
own, interesting personal history is not surprising.  Stanley is a part
of the NPM brand, it’s his.  Arguably, he is the brand.  Such
personal story telling is not uncommon among church entrepreneurs.  In
Section One of Deep and Wide, Andy Stanley attempts to
establish his authority as a church expert before making a biblical
case.  By the time readers get to Andy’s “biblical” argument for the NPM
model in Section 2, the reader has already subconsciously become an
observer of the Andy Stanley story.  If the reader isn’t careful, he
will miss how the story’s protagonist misapplies scripture to support an
untenable church model.

Deep and Wide

Andy Stanley presents his “Deep and Wide” model in Sections 3 and 4
of the book.  Section 5 is about how to lead an existing church through
the change processes in order adapt to Stanley’s model.  Andy lists a
number of “Catalyst” principles and templates to be followed.  These
items are not worthy of significant review.  Since Stanley’s model is
unbiblical, its specific inner-workings should also be rejected.  To be
sure, there is a lot of good common sense advice in these sections. 
(For example, Stanley points out that an unkempt nursery area will leave
parents too worried to focus on Sunday services.)  Just as sure,
however, is the folly of following Andy Stanley down his path of
pragmatism.  Deep and Wide is essentially a guide to “franchising McChruch.”  McDonald’s, Burger King, and Wendy’s have a franchise model.  So does North Point Ministries.  Unlike those fast food giants, Stanley professes that his idea for consumer appeal was given to him by God.[18]  Comparison of Stanley’s model to the word of God proves Stanley’s claim to be false.  The NPM
model is not from God and is not one for shepherding sheep.  It is a
model for herding goats.  Andy Stanley is a dangerous man whose pastoral
ideas are dangerous to the health of Christ’s church.  Deep and Wide is a book that should be marked and avoided.

*Please note that the preceding is my personal opinion. It is not
necessarily the opinion of any entity by which I am employed, any
church of which I am a member, any church which I attend, or the
educational institution at which I am enrolled. Any copyrighted material
displayed or referenced is done under the doctrine of fair use.

[1] p. 104

[2] There are also partner churches in Costa Rica, France, Mexico, and Venezuela.

[3] P. 18

[4] p. 69

[5] p. 15

[6] P. 14

[7] P. 15

[8] p. 16

[9] p. 60

[10] In English this term is transliterated as “ekklesia”.

[11] p. 62

[12] p. 59

[13] p. 298

[14] p. 12

[15] ibid

[16] p. 15

[17] P. 278

[18] p. 48

1 5 6 7