Jory Micah continues prancing into apostasy without a care in the world, giving the world a living, breathing emblem of what it means to be wholly without the mind of Christ. Known across social media as a breath of fresh-air for those man-hating liberal feminazi types who want to pretend like they still practice some form of piety while hating anything and everything about the God revealed in Scripture, she’s managed to get none other than Andy Stanley to agree with her give her cover for her wretched beliefs.
Not particularly unique or original in her own right, she is essentially the knock-off brand of Jen Hatmaker, or perhaps the Wish version of Beth Moore, only about 20 percent more honest, and she unleashed on the world of fresh controversy when she explained that the goal for Christians is not to be “Biblical” but Christlike”
This is because she doesn’t believe the bible and despises half the things it says, resulting in her being pro-LGBTQ, pro-choice, denying the existence of hell, and routinely referring to God as a woman. Its no wonder she doesn’t want anyone to be biblical!
This plays nicely with Stanley, who frequently holds similar views in terms of the bible’s usefulness and the degree we ought to follow it.
For a brief reminder of the various theological controversies surrounding Stanley, he made waves for encouraging Christians to essentially throw out the Old Testament, arguing that believers should “unhitch” themselves from portions of Old Testament Scripture. This is essentially a spin-off of the heresy of Marcionism. He went on the warpath against doctrine in general, claiming that “unity is more important than theology.” Stanley argued that Jesus’ birth doesn’t really matter, thus casting doubt upon his supernatural birth and the events surrounding the nativity and also tacitly denounced Biblical inerrancy, at least in the eyes of many.
One commenter, Matt, nicely summed up the problem with Micah’s and Stanley’s Views
Micah and Stanley have an idea of who Jesus is in their minds, and they want to define him absent and apart from the only source we have infallible knowledge of him.
And it shows.