Recently, I was sent a book by Charles Ryrie called So Great Salvation and a book by Charles Stanley called Eternal Security. I read them. And I have a question for you all: These men are highly respected teachers in the evangelical community. Based on some of the teachings they shared, I believe they are false teachers espousing heresy. Does this seem too strong? I've been told that they teach many good things, but I believe both are wrong about the essential nature of salvation.
Ryrie teaches that repentance (as historical Christianity understands it) is not necessary for salvation.(p.99) He draws a very sharp line between converts and disciples, and says discipleship is unnecessary for salvation (p.75-76). He says faith in Jesus is committing our eternal destiny to Him, but not necessarily committing our life on earth to Him (p. 123). He says that those who teach what he calls "Lordship salvation" are teaching a false gospel. He gives 3 reasons why people lack assurance (p.142), but never even mentions the biggest one: many people struggle with assurance because they are not saved.
Stanley's teaching is even worse than Ryrie's. He mentions "a Christian who at no point in his entire life bore any eternal fruit. And yet his salvation is never jeopardized." He also says, "there are Christians who show no evidence of their Christianity as well." And "Consequently, God does not require a constant attitude of faith in order to be saved -- only an act of faith." And "It [saving faith] is a singular moment in time wherein we take what God has offered." And "... You can't sin and live like the devil down here and get by with it even as a believer. The Bible says you will lose your reward but you'll be saved so as by fire. You won't lose your salvation, but there's a whole lot to lose, brother, by sinful living."
Stanley also says this: "Where is this place represented by the 'outer darkness' in Jesus' parables? To be in the 'outer darkness' is to be in the kingdom of God but outside the circle of men and women whose faithfuness on this earth earned them a special rank or position of authority. The 'outer darkness' represents not so much an actual place as it does a sphere of influence and privilege"
You don't have to repent to be saved??? You don't have to submit to Christ to be saved??? Salvation is much like a flu shot??? Outer darkness is heaven??? What "gospel" is this?
I was shocked in reading these two books from men I grew up having some familiarity with their names, and who have great respect in evangelical circles today. To say they are false teachers is a serious charge. But according to the Scriptures, which speak clearly on repentance, submission, and regeneration, I believe these teachings to be very, very dangerous and false. You can be wrong about many things, but when you beging making the door wide when Jesus made it narrow, I would contend you have become a false teacher.
Several brothers feel that I am much too strong in stating these things. Any thoughts? Insight? I want to be careful not to accuse a brother, but also want to warn my brothers to stay away from false prophets. I would say that Charles Stanley is not as obviously a false prophet as Joel Osteen, but I would warn men to stay away from him in the same way I would warn them to stay away from Osteen, because what he teaches about salvation is wrong. If you have a problem in a building on the 14th story, it isn't good. But if your foundation is crumbling, great will be the fall of your building.
When you tell men that are lost that all they need to do to go to heaven is "believe" in Jesus, say a prayer, and then teach that they can (not necessarily that they should, but that they can) go on living in sin, and still go to heaven, I believe that you make many men two-fold sons of hell. It is hard to share the Gospel with a lost man who is certain he is saved.
Thanks for reading and responding. May God bless you all.
