Some Honest Questions for Pastor Andy Stanley, and Updates on Campus Morality and on Broadcasting Freedom

[Download MP3]

Dr. Brown raises some probing questions in response to Pastor Andy Stanley’s controversial comments last week and then speaks with Jordan Sekulow concerning the FCC’s recent attack on freedom of speech. Dr. Brown will also share some shocking news from one of the nation’s leading campuses. Listen live here 2-4 pm EST, and call into the show at (866) 348 7884 with your questions and comments.


Hour 1:

Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: We all must examine ourselves and ask, “Am I seeking to please people or am I seeking to please God?”

Hour 2:

Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: We are not children of darkness, we are children of the Light; and that means we are awake and we are aware! Let us live as children of Light.



More than 25 years ago, Dr. Brown taught an 8-week, 12-hour class on spiritual warfare, and that class has stood the test of time as the very best teaching he has ever done on the subject. The audio CD for this series is $20, plus postage, but you can download the entire series for just $10 this week.!

Call 1-800-278-9978 or Order Online!

Other Resources:

Women In Ministry?

Moral Controversies and Kingdom Perspectives on the News

Reflections on the Pope’s Recent Comments and the Role of the Church in Society

  1. Dr. Brown is a Conservative Christian. Fine. Many people are.

    But he seems to do no self-reflection as he moves between his Conservatism and his Christianity.

    This was particularly glaring in today’s show.

  2. I haven’t listened to this yet.

    Excellent article by Dr. Brown (Some Honest Questions for Andy Stanley, latest article, Ask Dr. Brown)

    Greg, Please explain to us what you are talking about.

  3. I find so many Christians talking as if they are drunk, making no sense at all these days, and I believe it’s because they became comfortable with the things of this world rather than bear the cross.

    Though these rights in controversy here have always been around, and are constitutional, I suppose we do need the protection of new bills and laws because there are law suits being thrown at businesses who have done no wrong at all, and these law suits are very expensive to defend against, just as they are burdensome and unnecessary.

    There are so many people these days who seem to have fallen asleep,* again because they became comfortable with the things of this world rather than bear their cross.

    We need to come back to the cross.

    * And when people talk in their sleep, do they make much sense whatsoever?

  4. Pilot asked this question: “What is truth?”

    To some it seems, it’s a bright light that shines, and they don’t know what to call it. To them it is some kind of curious thing. They might call it some kind of an “ism”. Others look at it and don’t know what to make of it. They stand there on the highway, mesmerized.

  5. Ray,

    >> I suppose we do need the protection of new bills and laws because there are law suits being thrown at businesses

    Are you appealing for legalism? You don’t like civil rights laws so you think America needs even more laws!

    New saws to protect us from the old laws!

    I’m not sure but I vaguely remember the bible saying something about that.

  6. I think the signature heresy of the American church is that we have infused the Gospel with the Great American Liberal vs. Conservative Debate.

    Do you know what would be a true “Cultural Revolution”?

    If liberal and conservative Christians stepped back from American politics and modeled to the country how to accept and love each other, despite our differences.

    But, that was not today’s show.

  7. how can Michael Brown ( RIGHTFULLY ) divide the word as he has done here and pick apart Andy Stanley when he goes on Benny Hinn and Sid Roths shows ???
    ” woe unto you unless your righteousness exceed that of that pharisees ”
    Mike take the REDWOOD TREE out of your eye ! ! !

  8. Caucazhin, Jesus ate with sinners without finding every possible fault with them, and he was always rightly dividing the word.

    Jesus said those that follow him would be doing the same things as he did.

    And he did tell others to get the beam out of their own eye first.

  9. Is there a difference between something that obviously shows itself as if it’s a log coming out of someone’s eye, that seems to jump right out at you, something that seems to nearly knock you over, and you immediately wonder about it, wondering “Where is his understanding at, on this matter?”, and something in someone’s past that someone keeps on looking at and can not seem to forget….. some small thing, that seems to grow, and grow, and grow, but it’s really growing in one’s own eye?

  10. I remember as a new believer feeling I could not work at a grocery store because I would be selling cigarettes and alcoholic beverages. I felt that I would be putting my stamp of approval on these products that cause death and destruction of lives and families. And I can see how this can go farther and farther as to what may be something that someone may consider an act that supports sin in some indirect way, like the example of selling medical equipment to an abortion doctor. Is it that salesman’s responsibility to research every doctor he sells to, to find out who are abortion doctors? What if a gay couple orders a sheet cake just saying Congratulations…are we to refuse to do that to abstain from the appearance of “evil”?

  11. This issue can get very complicated very fast and become very burdensome. What about the baker making wedding cakes for marriages of couples that had no scriptural grounds for divorcing their previous spouses? How about baby shower cakes for gay couples or celebration cakes for Ramadan or a Buddhist affair? I mean, at what point is someone relieved of this responsibility of assuring the backgrounds of those they do business with?

  12. Lydia,

    1 Corinthians 10
    27 If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.
    28 But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof:

    You bring up some good points. What if we use Paul’s argument about food offered to idols…in reverse…kind of. If we have cakes pre-made with congratulations there is no problem with selling to anyone. If someone comes and orders a special cake that says the same with no reason given, what is the problem. If someone comes in and says this is for a celebration of a homosexual marriage, the situation is different. The same would go for a remarriage in my mind.

    According to Paul, if someone says that the food they offer us has been offered to idols we are to not partake for the conscience of the one that said it. That means that it would be a bad witness or a stumbling stone to them that would encourage them in idolatry or would ruin our witness against idols in their mind. It would help their conscience to ignore or to not condemn evil. It would justify their actions to them.

    As salt and light, we are not to cause someone that is in sin to thing that it is OK. We do not do that when we do not know that they are ordering a cake for a sinful occasion. Being gracious and loving sinners is good as long as it does not compromise our witness, encourage sin, or justify an evil conscience.

    1 Corintians 5
    11 But now I have written unto 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 no not to eat.

    As far as those that call themselves believers…we are not allowed to eat with them even if the food is not offered to idols. So the situation becomes more strict with homosexual and adulterous marriages when the parties involved claim belief in Messiah. So to decorate a cake for these is probably even more grievous to YHWH.


  13. Dr Brown! You mentioned in your program that there was a Scandinavian country where the Bishop had to find a priest who were willing to conduct a gay marriage in case some minister would decline to do so. That Scandinavian country is Sweden and the Church of Sweden (Lutheran). However it is not only the Bishop task but also the local vicar who is in charge over the priests working under him.

    If you want to become a priest in the Church of Sweden anno 2014 you must accept the practice of gender neutral marriages in general and so called gay marriages in particular. If not you will not be ordianed as a priest since your are illoyal to the Churchs order and values.
    Sincerely Magnus Nordlund, Sweden

  14. We live at a time when many things try to hide behind another name. Truth has a name and it isn’t discrimination.

  15. Lydia, Let your conscience be your guide. Meanwhile it seems we really do need some protection against injustice, and this bill that was vetoed by the governor of Arizona would have strengthened what our rights are under the constitution, in the minds and perhaps hearts of many, and this would have a healthy, healing effect on America as a whole.

  16. Could somebody take a good law, cause a big fuss, and do a lot of damage? Certainly.

    What if somebody really did refuse to sell a frozen pizza to someone because they thought he might eat too much, or because they believed it was unhealthy?

    Are we really our brother’s keeper to that kind of end?

    There is a difference between religious liberty, and religious bondage.

  17. Ray,

    You wrote:
    “Lydia, Let your conscience be your guide.”

    That is exactly what Paul said not to do in these situations, because our “good” conscience could still damage another’s or cause them to stumble. We are to be careful for their conscience’s sake.

    Some believers drink wine and eat meat and they are to be careful not to embolden the conscience of those that think it is wrong by eating and drinking in front of them even though it is only in their mind that it is wrong. We are surely not to embolden the nonbeliever’s conscience in idolatry or any other action that is truly a sin.

    1 Corinthians 10
    28 But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof:
    29 Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another man’s conscience?

    Romans 14
    21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.
    22 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.
    23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

    The only difference between the above verses and the topic at hand is that we are the servers instead of the receivers. And in a sense we are more accountable because we are putting forth effort and getting paid for a service. We are impacting the other’s life more than they are ours by them accepting the food that we have made.

Comments are closed.