Is Charles Stanley arminian or reformed?

[Marrow Man]

I would go to Mass before I would go to Benny Hinn.

 

[Curt]

Let's not forget - and I want to really walk on eggshells here - that in my very limited understanding, Dr. Stanley is no longer the "husband of one wife", having gotten a divorce in 2000. The man had once stated that, should he and Anna ever get divorced, he would resign. When that day actually happened, however, he refused to do so.

Aside from Stanley’s theology, let me comment on this statement regarding his divorce.

1) Dr. Stanley can not be accused of being the husband of more than one wife as he has never remarried.

2) SBC practice is inconsistent and unbiblical on this for two reasons- a) they most often refuse to ordain or install officers who have been divorced, without regard to cause of the divorce or whether the person has remarried; and b) they do not acknowledge (as the WCF XXIV does) there are biblical grounds for divorce and remarriage.

3) The Atlanta congregation seems to have made an exception for Dr. Stanley because of his prominence.

4) He would not be bound to his previous statement if he was promising something unbiblical.

5) If Stanley’s divorce could be regarded as biblically justified (and his wife is the one who refused reconciliation and pursued the divorce), the congregation goes beyond their biblical authority in requiring what amounts to a vow of future celibacy to continue in ministry as their pastor.

6) To my knowledge, this was never handled by a church court, as might happen in a Presbyterian situation; so we can not judge whether Mrs. Stanley had biblical grounds to seek a divorce.

7) I thank God for WCF XXIV and a system of ascending courts in Presbyterian polity.

My first thought when I saw the title of the thread was to answer, "divorced." Yes, he is also very Arminian. But while we're casting stones about prominent "churchmen" getting away with things, let's remember that there are some prominent types in confesssional denominations who manage to break the second commandment with impunity.

 

[Scott1]

For the original question,

Having listened to some of his programs years ago and from general knowledge:

Arminian-influenced (probably 3 of 5 points Calvinist without fully comprehending the system) + dispensational + no confession of faith to bind.

He preaches the gospel and God has used him to bring some people to Himself. He was president of the Southern Baptist Convention at least two terms.

My impression (because I do not follow his teaching or activities now) is that he is trending farther away from teaching the full counsel of God's Word as are many within "broad evangelicalism."

 

[Edward]

What happened to the Charles Stanley I grew up with?

Perhaps you have grown and matured in the faith.

 

[Mushroom]

"Now listen!... Listen carefully!"

 

[Brian Withnell]

I started this with just looking at his website, but with the people that have listened to him, it might change the opinion. The only caveat I would say is he may have changed? Don't know, and because I have a lot of good people to listen to, I don't bother with those I don't know. (I don't have time to listen to everyone that hangs out a shingle as a pastor, which is another reason I like Presbyterian polity. )

Is he reformed or arminian in his beliefs?

If he isn't reformed, he is real close. He holds to eternal security (what I would call God's preserving the saints).

He also seems very close on election. On the "In Touch" website, he states:

God chose to adopt you as His child before the foundation of the world. Why? For one reason and one reason only: He wanted to.

Would he classify himself as reformed? I don't know, but I would think he is so close he might be at least a four and a half point Calvinist.

-----Added 3/17/2009 at 10:44:01 EST-----

I would pick Spongebob Squarepants over Joyce Meyer or Benny Hinn!

-----Added 3/17/2009 at 10:58:07 EST-----

My father-in-law has been a very active member at FBC for more than 20 years. I attend almost every time I am in Atlanta, and I have heard dozens of his sermons.

He is not only Arminian, he is anti-reformed.

I'm surprised ... I went to the website and found what I thought were plenty of things that stated he had at least a view of election that predates creation, and that "eternal security" was a fact, that salvation was through adoption by God in his choice for no other reason than his own will. It took some digging, and there was at least some information that seemed to say there had been a change in his theology (especially concerning eternal security). I'm not sure of anything else, but if he holds that the only reason anyone is saved is because God chooses them from before the foundation of the earth by the council of his own will and no other reason, it sounds like the logical equivalent of total depravity, and at least "effectively limited atonement" (the atonement is at least not applied to anyone other than the elect).



You've heard him many times ... that has to count more than what I am reading from his website (what a man says sometimes is a lot more than what he writes).

 

[Kevin]

Brian please do not misunderstand me. FBCA is a positive force for the gospel in GA. And brother. Stanley is a Brother in Christ. And Dr Stanley was used by God to help return the SBC to a more biblical foundation. And like most baptists they are right at least 2 times a day.

However... the man himself, as well as his staff, hate the doctrines of grace, as we understand them.

He has preached against, as have his staff, the doctrines of grace.

My own family includes long time members & staff, and they have no doubt---Calvinism is a Heresy!