"Going"
The fourth objection centers on the fact that The Story was written by Max Lucado and a cohort (Randy Frazee) from his congregation (the Oak Hills Church in San Antonio). Lucado has been untrustworthy for 30 years. He gave up truth a long time ago—especially with regard to salvation. He replaced New Testament teaching with Calvinistic doctrine in his writings and on the radio. He carelessly cast out baptism as being necessary for salvation. Brethren have been defending that truth for centuries, but Lucado knew that he would not be nearly so popular an author or receive endorsements from Billy Graham and others if he maintained what the Bible teaches. So he gave in without a fight. He fellowships false worship and all manner of religious groups outside the body of Christ. Surely Christians will not trust such a man to provide them spiritual food, would they?
Someone wrote to a religious publication, that goes by the name of The Berean Call (not to be confused with brother Moses' fine weekly paper). The one who wrote was leery of The Story, which his church was using and wondered what TBC thought of it. Below are some of their thoughts.
We have been going through a copy of The Story for some time. When someone condenses the Bible into what they perceive are the important parts, what becomes quickly apparent is the truth of Paul's inspired statement that "all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness..." (2 Tim. 3:16-17). What some deem to be unimportant often contains the most pertinent details.
Written by TBC staff, this paragraph brings up an excellent point. If all Scripture is given by the inspiration of God (and it is), then how can 80% of it be deemed unimportant by anyone? The staff goes on to say that for portions that are missing a brief summary of the text is supplied. Then they provide an example of the way this method of operation works with the way Lucado and Frazee treated Genesis 13-19.
Lot made some bad decisions and found himself in deep trouble. He took up residence near Sodom. In retrospect, it was a poor choice of real estate. Soon the kings of Sodom, Gomorrah and three other kings squared off in battle against an enemy army. The kings of Sodom and Gomorrah lost, and the cities were looted. Lot and his family were among the captives (14-15, from the 2011 edition).
The summary then tells how Abram freed Lot and all the captives; it briefly describes Abram meeting "a priest" named Melchizedek and giving him a tenth of the spoils (15). Whoa! This typifies the shortcoming of a "summary." Why was Lot's choice of real estate a poor one? Nothing is said about Melchizedek also being a king (thus foreshadowing Jesus). Will the reader understand the point made in Hebrews? Oh, wait! Hebrews is not included in The Story. And what about Abraham's refusal to receive any reward from the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah, lest they should claim they made Abraham rich. This is not a minor detail.
But even worse is that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah is not even summarized! Why? Was Lucado afraid that homosexuals might not buy a copy if they found themselves condemned in it? What happens to Jude 7 then? Does it also leave out the destruction of Lot's wife? What does that do to Luke 17:32? Oh, that's right. Luke 7 is not included in The Story, nor is the book of Jude. And what about Lot's daughters filling him with wine in order to seduce him to have children, thus explaining the origin of the Moabites and the Ammonites? TBC comments:
Lucado and Frazee's omission of the full story of Sodom and Gomorrah is a great error. The Lord warned against adding to or taking away from Scripture (Deut. 4:2, Rev 22:19), and with good cause. The story of Sodom and Gomorrah is referenced throughout the Bible as a warning of God's judgment on those who do wickedly (see Deut. 29:23; Isa. 1:9; Jer. 23:14; 50:40; Lam. 4:6, 11; Zeph. 2:9; Luke 17:29; Jude 7; 2 Peter 2:6; etc. [abbreviations mine, GWS]).
This point ought to concern everyone greatly. God does warn about tampering with His Word, and if anyone has ever taken away from the Word, Lucado and Frazee are guilty.
TBC also states: "At times, the summaries seem to contain unsupported assumptions," which is not surprising, considering the authors. They comment further concerning deletions.
Regarding the "poetic books," nothing from Job, Ecclesiastes, or Song of Solomon is included. Concerning Psalms and Proverbs, only a relative few examples make it into The Story. The New Testament comprises summaries of the Gospels, some of Paul's epistles, Acts, and Revelation. The Sermon on the Mount is condensed, with much omitted. The epistle of James is omitted. What is called the Golden Rule is missing although Jesus calls it the summation of the entire Law and Prophets. Finally, very important teachings on the Kingdom of Heaven given by the Lord in Matthew 25 are also missing. Much as we could not recommend the Reader's Digest Bible from years ago, we cannot recommend a similar mutilation of the revealed Word of God.
In other words, The Story is rotten from beginning to end. What does it matter if it reads like a novel if the meat of the Scriptures has been omitted? One is left with really tasty toast, some delicious condiments, and a few chips—hardly a spiritually nourishing meal. Christians might want to consider having nothing to do with this work of man and commit themselves instead to the word of God. All of it.