Perhaps I'm too simplistic but I cannot accept that Jesus would meet me in a lie. Update: I've been reading the responses and I'm in agreement that Jesus could meet one in the lie but then He calls them out of it. He would not stay in the lie with me. Now that might take some time but ultimately if I chose to continue in the lie then I would be in rebellion. That could be dangerous for my soul and certainly would not be evidence of acknowledging the Lordship of Christ.
There's a difference between a lie and a delusion. And there's a difference between accepting something as true for someone and accepting something as objectively true.
I think what he’s saying is that from their worldview they are not lying. They are referring to gender identity when talking about themselves not biological sex (gender identity being the social script/role and internal identification). Conservatives tend to see biological sex and gender as the same thing, while progressives tend to see them as different. From a worldview where sex and gender are different you can technically be telling the truth about yourself. However, an essential and important conversation is if sex and gender should be separated.
I can't get around the idea that in the name of compassion or trying to reach them with the gospel, we affirm a lie that is damaging to them. Even if I put aside the idea that it is not telling the truth about what God says in his Word, Sean is exactly right that we are harming them as an individual human being to not correct a destructive lie that they believe. I cannot see that as loving in any circumstance. We are reaffirming their worldview rather than putting the brakes on it and making them think about it. The pragmatic question Preston asks about using it as a way to continue the relationship seems like saying we should not share the gospel or share anything offensive with a person and lie to them so that we can then share the gospel. When it is the gospel itself that is the power of God for salvation. Even if I did not believe what the Bible said about how God made everyone male and female, I still could not lie to a person about their gender identity out of care for them.
That is definitely not what he saying, I have gotten to be very clear about the Gospel and my viewpoints on a biblical world view of male and female only and God's design of marriage be between man and women only, with multiple gay friends simply because I was careful to offend and turn them off of relationship with me. I am not afraid to let the Gospel offend people, but as much as possible I try not offend to give the best chance for the person to truly accept the Gospel, by not offending them in other ways. I think this is where Preston is coming from. I have seen this approach be much more affective in reaching people than the former. I would also like to know how many Christians with these strong opinions actually gay friends have they engage with and are trying to reach them?
Preston uses two words that I think are important to understand. Affirming and accommodating. Just using someone’s preferred pronouns is not affirming, but it can be accommodating. Preston references Paul accommodating the Greeks by using a Zeus reference, but Paul certainly not affirming Zeus as a god.
@@randyletourneau3430 I am trying to find where Paul referenced Zeus, but I can't. Can you tell me where that was? I completely disagree with this dichotomy, even if this was in the Bible. You are assenting to their worldview by affirming (or accommodating, if you prefer), their pronouns. You are both lying about who they are, and in so doing, you are supporting their self-destructive ideology. That is not loving. They need to be lovingly confronted with the truth. Where does Paul or Jesus either affirm or accommodate lies?
@@biblicalworldview1 When Preston and Sean are discussing Acts 17, they talk about when Paul was talking before the Athenians and he used a phrase that, to the Athenians, would have meant Zeus, but Paul used it to point to Jesus. And accommodating is very different from affirming. When you affirm, you agree with the person you are talking to. When you accommodate, you are simply removing obstacles to being heard without agreeing. It is not being confrontational when you don't agree. It is not purposefully communicating something that will make the listener turn away or not arguing something they say that is wrong in order to keep the dialog going. Have you never heard someone say something that you thought was untrue and did not respond to it because of whatever reason? Or do you decide to point out everything that everyone says that is wrong in every conversation? We can all decide to accommodate those seeking Jesus in order to not push them away. That is exactly what Jesus and Paul both did and Paul said he became all things to all people to win some ... he tried to accommodate.
How about simply leading with love and then when you’ve established relationship with them, maybe you can talk more deeply about what’s going on with them. Whether you think it’s a lie or not, it someone to their core believes something, we need to figure out the reason before we go trying ti fix it. You not “affirming” it isn’t going to make them feel differently about themselves. You think you’re the first person to tell them they aren’t what they say they are? Share the gospel. Affirm them as HUMANS, and then maybe you can have the other convos. Just my two cents.
Thank you, Preston and Sean. Excellent conversation. These are tough questions. I wish my fellow Christians would listen to one another as well as the two of you did!
I think this is painting with a bit of a broad brush. There are certainly some true believers that haven't figured this out that may find it necessary to offer push back on unnecessarily harsh believers that do not compromise on the truth.
Jesus walked in truth. Paul walked in truth. They would NOT have used preferred pronouns. The Bible says we're to walk in spirit and truth. This is a problem with eternal consequences. We need to love people enough to not pander.
How exactly is it loving to, when someone respectfully asks you to use certain pronouns that make their life a little easier, for you to say "nope, I refuse to hear you and acknowledge what you feel and show any amount of what you would perceive to be kindness, instead I'll be the 1000th person to tell you that you're just a sinner on their way to hell?"
Thank you Sean. I regularly listen to both you and Preston and I appreciate the tension you both help me hold. May God continue to strengthen your friendship!
I am glad that people are having conversations again ,especially about this. If you don’t speak to and listen to each other, how can you gain understanding? My faith doesn’t crumble . Free speech is vital.
Great discussion! Really encouraged by this discussion and really got me thinking! I’m glad you invited Preston to have this conversation about his controversial views rather than talking about him and critiquing him. This form of discussion actually helps us find clarity to both views instead of straight up downplaying the other person and name calling them. Please continue to do more videos like these! Appreciate the work you do to help educate us. God bless you and your ministries.
Great video. Great conversation. My one disappointment is that y'all never got to the conversation about the sinfulness of SSA. To me, this is THE question - the one that has made other Christian leaders label Preston a heretic. Would have loved to hear some good conversation on that topic.
To get into the topics to spicy for RUclips, they should cover the reason that most people are turned gay. Hint: the majority of cases have to do with abuse not nature.
I think there should be a conversation about how many of the people were molested as a child and the harm it caused, especially with vulnerable children stuck in a bad home life !
Interesting. I actually think that Acts 17 goes against what Preston says. I mean think about this. Paul is using the same term, “God”, as they are. But rather than validating how the Athenians were using it, Paul is correcting them by telling them how the term is supposed to be used. This is the opposite of what Preston is saying. He seems to imply that Paul was encouraging their current misuse of that term. Whenever Paul accommodated to his audience, it was always to correct their false notions, and not to validate them.
I feel like the pronoun issue is more akin to someone’s wife asking, “do I look fat?” I don’t know very many men, or women, that hold to truth in those instances.
Listening to Sprinkle I was thinking about the following. Is it being helpful to a person who thinks that he is Napoleon to acknowledge him as "Your Majesty"? Same goes with "my pronouns". Playing along might seem kind but is it? Here's another hypothetical to ponder. A young woman, 25 years old, 5' 9" and weighs 80 lbs thinks that she is fat. She wants liposuction and a prescription for diet pills. Should we play along and give her what she wants? Let's expand the same hypothetical. This same young woman believes that she is a man and wants her breasts removed and a hysterectomy and a prescription for testosterone. Should we play along and give her what she wants? How is that response helpful? Reality is objective. There is no "my reality" that can be imposed on the rational world.
None of those analogies are valid to compare to gender dysphoria, fwiw. All of these imply that they are believing a lie about themselves. That's simply not the case for trans ppl. They are acknowledging something true about themselves to the world, only for the world to call them mentally ill or making up their own reality. If a woman is 80lbs and thinks shes overweight, she believes something objectively wrong about herself, no doctor would support her. If you think this is the same for trans ppl, you don't know what you are talking about; I strongly suggest you actually talk to and get to know a real live trans person, so as to better understand their actual experience!
I was trained to be a nurse's aid and they told us to treat dementia patients with agreeing with their imagination of seeing people or thinking a deceased person is still alive. is this accommodating? or affirmation?
I think it’s accommodating, but it’s also in a different category than gender issues. A person whose gender identity is non-binary/different from their biological sex is generally capable of understanding the claim that those things are untrue and the difference between right and wrong, whereas for a person with dementia, they’re not necessarily capable of making those distinctions and to try and force it would be legitimately distressing.
Horrible comparison since trans people are aware they aren't physically the opposite gender. Just imagine waking up in the wrong body. Maybe it's a delusion, maybe your brain is wired for one gender and your body is the other. Either way you know there is a mismatch and people aren't seeing something you don't see. In fact you are seeing more. It's more about arguing definitions at that point on what you truly are unless there's some sort of scientific way to resolve what's going on in your brain.
It's dementia. When we agree with dementia patients, it's agreeing with a delusion. Agreeing with name changes or pronouns is agreeing with a delusion. Simple.
I believe it is categorically different. The difference is that the delusion in a dementia patient though wrong, generally doesn't have a moral or sinful component. Also, if there is little to no chance of correcting the dementia patient's misunderstanding, there is no upside and quite a downside in attempting.
40:00 Preston's statement here goes against his own position. Paul is actually correcting their incorrect definition of God, not adopting their use of the phrase and word theos. Preston's position is that we adopt their definition of man or woman for the sake of reaching them. It's biblically indefensible. Paul and Jesus were quick to correct. They never paid lipservice to ungodly ideas.
37:19 - Is there a time we affirm something someone is not? I believe there is. I am caring for my loved one with dementia and his internal reality often does not match actual reality. Some days he tells me that someone was just at the door when they were not and it is better for him if I just accept that as his narrative and move on. I don’t indulge him in it, but I don’t try to argue him out of it, either. Other times, he tells me about something that happened and I can’t understand it, but he needs meaningful interaction to feel human, so I ask him questions - even though I have no idea what he is talking about. I am indulging his delusion, even if I don’t understand it. And then there are times when he thinks he is in danger when he is not; in those moments, I assure him that we will make sure everything is okay. I think the difference is mental capability and whether indulging the delusion is going to ultimate lead him to a better outcome. I will always try to find the path back to reality for him, which often looks like subtly changing the subject, but there are some moments when I just sit with him in his delusion.
Interesting example. I agree we can sit with people who may harbor mental delusions, but is that the same as affirming their delusions? Seems close but quite different to me.
I have probably listened/watched over 500 videos/podcasts about transgender issues. My son is currently transitioning. With almost all the detransitioners stories (mostly non-christians) they have recommended to not use pronouns. They stated that it was not helpful and it lead them deeper into the delusion. They appreciated those that did not affirm their new gender identity. I think it is more harmful than helpful. I actually stopped seeing my Christian counselor of almost 3 yrs because she said I was being unloving for not calling my son by his new name.
I don't know what to say because the current evidence is that detransitioning is rare. So if the assumption is it's a delusion you could be actively harming them. If I was in your position I'd try to learn the science as well as I could because ideology can just be flat out harmful if you get the facts wrong. Personally I'm not religious and I'm pro gay/trans rights but I do have hesitancy on certain issues because I want facts and not ideology to be the guide. Sometimes we don't have every relevant fact but at least having the research as a baseline is good.
@ That is incorrect. The activists are keeping the detransitioner stories out of the media. Like I said I have been learning about this issue for 5 yrs and I have heard all sides of this conversation. I am aware of the studies on both sides. I use the word “delusion” because that is the word the detrans use.
I find Preston to not give direct answers. He generally claims complexity as the answer. I don’t have clarity on his theology after listening to him for 2 hrs. I do think he elevates personal experiences and tends to use language to preserve relationships. Language matters and words have meanings.
"use language to preserve relationships" Yup he's most definitely motivated by preserving relationships, I suspect he has a lot of pressure he needs to sort out what he's going to do with. Things are always messy when friendship and love are involved.
I appreciate Preston Sprinkle a lot. I find it so odd that some want to label him a heretic because of disagreement over secondary issues within the LGBT argument, when he should be viewed as an ally.
I am suspicious of Preston sprinkle because of the impact he’s had on some of my family members. He may mean well, but he may just be sneaky. Something seems off about him.
@@lauramikow2381 This is what gets you cut off from friendships with trans people. You see their delusion and a refusal to recognize their deeply held belief is seen as a rejection of them. They are the people Jesus told the disciples to dust off their feet and move onto the next house.
No. Giving in to their delusion doesn't stop there. They take and demand more and more until you say no, then you are cut off. It's an appetite that is NEVER satisfied.
If he is unwilling to be corrected then there's not really much conversation can do. If he is willing to be corrected then I like to ask him why that particular identity is important to him and how it forms his world view. Those so openly hostile to the truth aren't beings you should spend a lot of time around, demonic or human.
I dont know who this guy is but the bible clearly says what will happen to homosexuals and other sinners. They will not make heaven. So this man can say all he wants but the bible does not lie.
Do we actually believe that we are more just and compassionate than God? He knows and loves our children, siblings, friends, neighbors more than we do. I cannot imagine distorting God’s word or character in to accommodate my sin or anyone else’s . I don’t think that is loving. Believe me, no parent wants to be up against this current culture, especially where their child is concerned.
Jesus was about truth and compassion. I'm pretty sure he would gracefully point out that God created man and woman and if that wasn't understood he would get more direct.
It's kind of disappointing how many times Preston had to explain gender dysphoria to Sean. You're not affirming that they are not their biological sex by using their pronouns. Trans people know what their biological sexes are. The pronouns are tied to their own identity, and that is not a matter of truth or fiction. It's just a matter of whether you want to be charitable or not.
Except there ARE Trans people who claim to be what they identify as. "Transwomen are women" and that guy on Trevor Noah who said "I'm made from biological stuff. I'm not a cyborg. My drivers license says female. So I am, in fact, a biological female."
On an unimportant side note, removing the male from the volleyball team doesn't mean your team would have beat that team. It would have been easier to beat them but doesn't mean they would have.
Hi @SeanMcDowell. Based on this interview and Preston's conclusions, my question is whether Preston Sprinkle is a heretic since Rosaria Butterfield has called him one. What do you think about that?
What if identifying as a “gay” Christian is a stumbling block for other believers? That alone is enough reason to steer away from identifying as a gay believer or even utilizing the term as a potential port of entry when engaging with non-believers. Moreover, how do you think the vast majority of people define the term “gay?” This seems pretty straightforward to me. Great show!
Preston on pronouns: Language is flexible, so I can use pronouns to reflect someone else’s stated internal feelings even if I disagree with their worldview. *Notice how he didn’t say, “even if their worldview is wrong”?* Sean: Names have that flexibility, but pronouns don’t. Preston: But language changes over time with culture-so it’s fine. *Language is supposed to change over time naturally with culture-not be forced to change because some people have an agenda! People with that reasoning would have no problem with Newspeak.*
Would Jesus or Paul use preferred pronouns? No, but they also wouldn't use a smartphone or upload videos to RUclips for the same reason. They had no such concepts in their culture.
This is where reading your Bible is important. Paul was all about spreading the gospel to as many places as possible. So, if technology was available at that time to spread the gospel through other means, might he have used it? Maybe so. Was Paul also in his epistles very careful about correcting the various churches when they deviated from the truth? Yes, this was extremely important to him. So, would he have engaged in affirming deviations from the truth today? I highly doubt it.
@gtf5392 If you want to take statements made in Paul's letters and extrapolate a general principle from them to apply to issues facing modern society you are definitely free to do that but that's not the question that was asked. The question "would Jesus or Paul use preferred pronouns" makes no sense. If you instead wish to ask "Can we use the writings of Paul to try and apply a principle that can help guide our decisions today in a completely different culture and time than those writings were intended for?" then that's a different question.
Did Paul "adapt" his methodology/message in order to not create unnecessary obstacles to certain groups? In Acts 15:19-21 James tells Paul to include a few elements of the Law in his presentation so that the ones who had been raised on Moses wouldn't have to reject the gospel immediately. Paul didn't consider eating meat sacrificed to idols as sinful, but he was willing to treat it as so for the benefit of others. Is treating something that is morally acceptable as though it were unacceptable comparable to treating something unacceptable as though it were acceptable? I'm not arguing in favor of this, I'm just thinking through it.
Which eventually becomes very obvious you are doing so. You can say the confused, malicious, or self-serving individual's name but it starts sounding very awkward in conversation. Basically there's not way to interact in a group setting without it coming up.
I don't see what's wrong with having a deconstructor speak no matter his other views. I mean we disagree with the deconstruction on the outset, right? So obviously we'd have other disagreements....?
In God there is neither male nor female, those who are questioning their gender identity could be in a perfect headspace for gaining a new identity in Jesus Christ. My pronouns are saved and Child of God
I would have liked to see Sean draw out Preston on the fact that he specified *unwanted* same sex sexual attraction as a result of the Fall. Edited to add: standpoint theory alert! Not sure why Preston would apply that to everything except the Bible. What’s true is true, regardless of whose mouth speaks it.
I wouldn't say LGBTQIA issues are dividing the church, so much as they are helping reveal who the sheep and goats are. Not everyone who visits a local church building is a member of Christ's church.
I really appreciate this video! I disagree with a lot of what Preston says, but I do think he is very graceful and presents well his view - albeit I don’t quite think some of the logic in hermeneutic is always working or consistent. I love a good faith conversation with respect and grace to one another. Regarding those calling themselves a “gay Christian” it is ontologically identifying with a sin - I’ve never heard anyone say “I’m a porn addicted Christian,” or “I’m an adulterous Christian” and it seems odd to me. However thank you! I love the in person dialogues, and really enjoyed this! ❤ I think we need to prioritise truth and speak it in love - and the arguments of using pronouns too so we don’t scare people off is exactly what I’ve heard churches say “we can’t preach about hell it’ll scare people off - just talk about love” and it’s not being fully honest and truthful - and I think missioogical defence isn’t a good one when you’re not speaking truth. I could be very wrong, but just thoughts as I am watching
Seems less of a moral issue with homosexuality when adultery by remarriage is over looked all the time and Jesus taught directly on the subject and adultery is in the Ten Commandments which can’t be said about homosexuality. Just ignore it like you do with Jesus own teachings on adultery by remarriage!
chastity, with the exception of procreation, is a highly valued virtue in most churches. the discussion should not be about same sex attraction it should be about chasity. before about 1890 the word that was invented by germans and added homosexuality into our vocabulary was pedophilia. those that wrote the bible disliked the greeks and romans and thus the pedophilia involved with those societies. it took almost 2000 years to turn that dislike into something more general and it pushed many away from the church.
I don't need to be an expert of linguistics to say that he/she pronouns are used in an objective sense by common culture. He is not a "pronoun" that can be contextually understood to talk about a female.
"He is not a "pronoun" that can be contextually understood to talk about a female." Wrong. ex: That driver didn't use his turn signal. In this sentence "his" can be understood as a male driver or a driver of unspecified sex aka male or female.
1:29:36 and right there, that disgust Preston expresses toward what he derides as "conversion therapy," proves the point you were just making, Sean, that the culture disproves of exploring change in sexuality, thereby cementing "gay" as intrinsic to identity. Preston can use linguistics all he wants, but the fact is he thinks just like the world when it comes to the innateness of homosexuality. His Side B approach offers no real insight or help for those seeking sexual integration, and that's why.
To that point, see how quick he is to give other Side B types like Wes Hill the benefit of the doubt. But whenever he speaks of ex-gay ministry or therapy for SSA, he's quick to mock or condescend.
The gender woke thing is bout power. Nobody disputes people's experience makes them tuned to different things and ask different questions. Femisinsm excludes as an enemy the western traditional culture no matter who or what gender a person is. The biblical writers never had these experiences or beliefs from either the feminist or the modern western cultural apologist. A homosexual has been made a political identity - it's gone way beyond an ontological descriptive. It (a gay person in the modern sense) is completely alien to the bible, they didn't have Marx or Hegel filling the biblical writer's heads. They had people who read Enoch and 2nd temple lituriture so reading the bible with a deliberate "critical lens" is a fallacy and interpretive crisis.
I agree with Sean on names. If I'm just meeting you and all I know is your name, there's nothing else to go off of. So I can refer to this person as their new name but I don't have use their so-called preferred pronouns. But I also have other info on this person in terms of their outward physicality.
I'm fine with using whatever name someone wants me to use. People can change their name. I'll even avoid using a pronoun they don't like but I won't use she for a man or he for a woman. That's where I see the line for me, to cross it is to actively lie to someone.
I feel it’s different when you’re meeting a trans person for the first time. You only know them as they introduce themselves. So you’re right, you don’t have much choice. It’s the issue when you witness the person’s change.
When Paul quotes a Greek poet and uses the term "God" in a way that doesn't match his audience's understanding of that word, his intent in using that word still matches reality. "God" means Yahweh creator regardless of what his audience understood that word to mean.
The situation I have the most trouble with is using the natural pronoun for a person in a group context. Since the group has affirmed a certain pronoun which may or may not be reflective of the individual do I use that to ease communication? Also that individual may outwardly appear to be of one gender and that appearance is false. Similarly with the "gay" shorthand term. It's fairly common parlance to mean a general overarching class of people. There's not an English word for ungendered 3rd person singular, unless I want to use 'it', which attacks the individual's "Made in the image of God" status. English doesn't have words for all the concepts and perversions of the day so the question is if I should be repeatedly verbose each time I refer to such a concept or if I should use the enemy's language.
It seems that people who hate on Preston from the extreme end often let their pride influence their ability to think clearly. Sean just gave a masterclass on how to push back reasonably. It seems very obvious that Preston is an ally, though his views may not align perfectly with orthodoxy, and I believe he would acknowledge that as well. The focus of this discussion is undoubtedly secondary; he has consistently reaffirmed the majors. If people still can't comprehend at this point, it is, Lord, forgive them, for they know not what they do 🙏🏽
Preston brings up anecdotes a lot. Which doesn't refute his position but more begs the question: do we address this on an a case by case basis? Let's say someone smokes pot or drinks to excess: do you immediately address those sins or let the spirit convict them? On the other hand, you wouldn't *endorse* that behavior. On the...other hand, is viewing yourself as the opposite gender a *sin* or just incorrect? Would we feel the need to tell a non-believer they must admit that 2+2=4 to be a Christian? Well, again, we probably wouldn't *affirm* that 2+2=5 but this belief isn't necessarily *sinful*...
Nice conversation.....But what did it accomplish? Is an LGBTQ person (A believer) saved or not? Isn't salvation really the ONLY point here? How about we adress that next time?
In terms of the argument of whether to use pronouns or not. This is not a blanket statement issue, as we heard from the testimonies its clearly a case by case review. Is the Holy Spirit telling us to use or not use the pronouns, if it feels hard but right then you know the correct course of action. Some Christians will use the wrong preferred pronouns to cause arguments and make themselves feel superior and others will avoid pronouns just to avoid confrontation. It depends on the person, the relationship and whether you are going to witness to them or not. Then pray and listen to the Holy Spirit whether it is a difficult task or not
My question to those who are taking the position sex and gender are separate "entities" with sex being biological and gender being internal identification: Is it possible to be a female male or a male female? If a biological male identifies as a female, then would it be accurate to describe him as female male? Trying to separate gender and sex makes no sense in the Biblical worldview, does it?
I am grateful for this conversation. Thank you. Question: Is SSA viewed differently from other lustful appetites that are surrendered and no longer desired, like drinking, overeating, sexual promiscuity, masturbation, pornography? Is there freedom from SSA lust? Seems SSA is always referred to as current or desired and not past tense even when proclaiming to be a Christian. When personally, my experience (sanctification process) of withdrawing from the world and drawing near to God has taken past sinful desires away. They no longer have the pull or craving as they once did. Is there something I'm missing?
At 39:21 Preston says that Jesus did not address the pronoun topic. And of course, he did not address the issue itself. But that is the case with many issues. The real question is what is the reasonable moral implication from the norms of creation that he does teach. In this way Jesus does answer the question. A Christian is going to strive to use language that matches the creation norms and is going to opposes social language movements which undermine or wish to eradicate the norms that Jesus says are put into reality by the creator as physical ontological realities.
I watched the whole debate. While you two did a good job with certain issues, I felt like the underlying premise, that homosexuality is unacceptable in God's kingdom, was never questioned. This is why the conversation will never move forward. In the ancient world, two men (or women) could never live in society peacefully as a committed couple. It was an absolute impossibility. So scripture was addressing a narrow band of homosexual acts, based on an imbalance of power. Today's world is different. I have close family who are gay. I know they are not choosing a 'lifestyle' but rather have been built differently from the start. God made them, designed them, as gay individuals. Otherwise they would not be gay!! How can Christians disapprove of what God made? It makes no sense to me.
Gay marriage or family is no longer a christian vs secular thing. It’s now affirming vs non affirming churches and you guys are pitching churches that will literally teach people God desires them to be alone without romantic, sexual, or life partner connection + no kids or family while the other churches say that’s nonsense, we support you finding happiness in God with a spouse and family. If you guys are wrong I hope you understand how many lives you mislead into a life of loneliness. And yes most all of these people will admit to that loneliness in honesty but it’s a just sacrifice in their eyes - but what if it’s not a just sacrifice - what if it’s cultural stubbornness? All those families which could have been. Think about that.
Again Sean and Preston: While I appreciate this conversation is in good faith and good intentions, I seriously think this conversation misses the whole point of grace in the Bible. Why are we sooo adamant on sexuality which is a culture war topic today that Jesus rarely references? Jesus talked the most about money and how to overcome societal boundaries in promoting and spreading love. Why are we not talking about Trump's incoming administration with the most billionaires ever in his cabinet that is going to suck up the American wealth and ruin the economy? And in the process many people's livelihoods? Why don't we talk about the fact that people cannot work at a liveable wage while the Elon Musks of the world reap millions in profit? All of these things and more affect the whole larger population and Jesus calls these things out directly! But sure, let's discuss why someone shouldn't identify as "gay", meanwhile we are ignoring all the larger systemic issues that Jesus time and time against calls us to unite to take a stand on. If your theology is threatened by someone's sexual identity then that is a very shallow theology, missing the point of grace, love, and restorative justice that we can all work towards as seen in the Bible. And I know people will say to this comment "you're not a real Christian because you don't take scripture seriously" And my response is, all I am doing is that I am loving ALL of my neighbors, working to bring peace in my community, and follow the teachings of Jesus. If that makes me not a Christian then so be it. I'd rather follow Jesus in his teachings and love and larger goal of restorative justice than sit around and debate on whether or not identifying as Gay is proper or not. Again, you're completely missing the whole point of why Jesus came in the first place: to restore love, peace, and justice to those under the boot of empire.
Have you even read the bible? Jesus did not come to overthrow the Roman Empire. The gospel is not about money. You have made your own version of Jesus and decided he agrees with you on everything. He didn't talk about LGBT issues because they were not issues in his day. The Jews already knew homosexual acts were wrong and men were not pretending to be women. You shouldn't worry so much about whether the world loves you and focus on being obedient to what God has said through the scripture.
This is said anytime someone opens their mouth about LGBT and Christianity. Talking about it is not singling it out. The Bible is clear on its stance and when there’s a huge movement straying away from truth it’s important that we stand firm, as Christian’s, on truth. It’s being talked about so adamantly because it’s such a big issue in today’s society. Part of “loving” people is guiding them in the right direction. Affirming and staying silent on a lifestyle that is unfulfilling and could ultimately send people to hell is not loving. Not saying we should go protest at every pride parade but conversations like this are important and spreading truth will always be important. Especially when a lot of those who claim to represent Christianity today are spreading lies.
@@C1461-l1b Please explain this to me. I have several family members married to their partners of the same sex, have kids who are my cousins, and I have grown up with them and loved them to death. I sincerely believe you can be queer, trans, straight, and be Christian as our faith is nothing to do with our sexuality. Again, all I am doing is loving all of my neighbors (which does not include trying to point them in a "right direction" so they won't go to hell - for that is not loving at all and disobeys Jesus simply command to love your neighbor with no qualifications to it) and following the teachings of Jesus. If that makes me not a Christian to you so be it. You can say I am going to hell all you want but we live, die, and breath the same air. I can't stand your theology that is exclusionary and so narrow minded. For it is that exact theology that is currently allowing Christian nationalism to reign over the States.
I don't know what the gospel means, especially as regards LGBTQ, but if these issues are splitting the church, it seems to me there's a good chance the church doesn't know what the gospel is either, especially as regards any kind of sinner.
The Evangelion (gospel) is the news of a new king and kingdom being established. The "good news" is that God loves humans and has made a way to be in communion with Him.
@@stetsonscott8209 I think that if it were expereinced as a strong reality, the emphasis would not be on parsing what people call themselves, how they define it, or in making sure borders hold. If the borders are that fragile, well ...
@rgmrtn The policing has to do with the identity of God. The God of Bible is interested in being recognized, especially as God Most High from among many spiritual beings who also have powers and authorities. People police God's identity because personal relationship is predicates on knowledge (which is why intimacy is called "knowing" in scripture). If people start invalidating personally held convictions over propositions about God's character, one is likely to feel defensive for fear of embarrassment or alienation. It would be like somebody came up to you and said your coffee cup gift for your best friend is terrible because your best friend hates coffee. The problem is you are very sure your friend has written you and said clearly they love coffee. You might understand how people could be defensive.
I doubt the creator of the universe cares who you fall in love with or your gender, Jesus said sell all your possessions give it to the poor and follow him, hows that going?
"creator of the universe cares who you fall in love with or your gender" Your phrasing indicates to me you believe everything in the world is as it is supposed to be. Why do you think Jesus died? if you admit evil into the picture then maybe you'd see that every person has things which are not right they must reconcile by following Jesus.
It is especially important foe Christian parents not to accomodate trans pronouns. When they do, it makes detransitioning much harder, if possible at all. I know of 3 people who ultimately detransitioned and are very thankful their parents did not cave to the cultural language that would have fueled the trans deception. I've heard Preston be snarky about people who don't "accomodate" pronouns, but it is not the most loving thing to do. It solidifies the lie in the person's heart and mind.
I really appreciate the discussion. I would identify Preston’s position on cultural flexibility of language at 36:55 to be problematic. Sean is taking the principled position that there are some aspects of language that are worth fighting for because they do reflect a stable and fixed truth about reality. Preston is being mislead by the concession that some of language is a construct and subject to change, but then leveraging this into opposing the need fight certain attempts to obfuscate fixed truths in nature. Obfuscating language is morally problematic because the harm done is systemic and wider than the supposed good done for the individual one is trying to accommodate. We should investigate accommodations that don’t give up this important ground. Use a person’s name. Let them know you care but you need to honor the truth by at least not lying as you understand it. That can be done in a gracious way. People should object to the changing of the dictionary on certain matters. We should acknowledge that some matters are less important and not every shift in language reflects the attempt to obfuscate natural fixed truths, BUT in the case of pronouns that is exactly what is at stake. I love Preston’s intention, but his view on the flexibility of language gives up the farm by allowing the flexible aspects of language to erode the need for language to also reflect fixed truths. The fight over language is worth having it’s an absolute necessity today. And the children of this world are wiser in this regard than the children of light. They KNOW it matters.
Preston Sprinkle seems like a very pleasant person but I can't agree with him re the pronouns and the identity stuff. He has no biblical grounds for his arguments, whereas Sean is very convincing, drawing from the Bible and common sense.
I'm reminded of the time our Lord referred to a woman as a dog, because of social convention, the time he called his disciple Satan. Perhaps being rigid on this matter misses the point? God help us.
@ If your church doesn't want gay people fine. There are churches that allow gays to be members. How about just exclude and ignore and go on your merry way worshiping a book?
@@LindeeLove They all fall in the category of things that Satan twisted from their true orientation. In this case the true orientation is loving marriage as set up by God in Genesis 2:22-24. Since sin entered the world man has been led astray by many twistings of this design.
Funny how people believe in free speech but not free association. Jesus hung out with people that got him accused of endorsing their choices, it's such a foolish idea to criticise you Shaun for speaking at a conference. Just to be clear, I wouldnt go to the conference because it's not what I'm interested in, but I'm not going to cancel a teacher just for associating with people I don't agree with. The X arguments and factions in Christianity is disgustingly immature in my eyes.
@@SeanMcDowell Thanks for your fast reply Sean. I will watch your reaction video. I am a queer christian. Will be in Atlanta in 2 days for the annual national queer christian conference (side A,B,Y) christians attend. Many evangelical, many agnostics and many deconstructing BUT we all worship together and all love Jesus yes even agnostics. We are open about our mental health. We have strong community and the love we have for Jesus is deep. We are inclusive. Most of us reconstruct our faith and this is a beautiful thing. Please know that I and so many have suffered for years with internalized homophobia and being marginalized and ostracized. Christ was always my strength to get through everything. We mask and hide who we truly are and develop OCD, anxiety and depression as a result. Queer christians are jailed in Nigeria for 14 years even today in the largest African nation, they are killed as of this year by law in Uganda (mixed muslim and christian nation), queers are killed in many muslim nations and there are so many queer muslims who christians are welcoming. This is an opportunity to welcome and usher muslim brothers who are queer yet when christians are homophobic that opportunity is lost.
@@SeanMcDowell You would be surprised how many queer buddhists, hindus, and atheists there are as well who cannot open up to anyone in their family. Many turn to Christ because they see that the west has welcomed at least on a social level queerness. This matters more than you can ever realize. I tried to unlike myself 17 times over this very issue. Over 100,000 Americans alone have undergone conversion therapy. Many of them did not survive. Hitler put gays in concentration camps along with Jews. Portsmouth prison in NH jailed gays for decades just for being gay. America had sod*my laws for many years. How much more persecution do we have to face in our own communities, living lives of complete isolation in the closet. It's a shame that so many churches today even in the most liberal cities like L.A. have exgay ministries and see homosexuality as a demon. The greek words do not mean homosexual. Ask greek people who know the language what they think of those words and they will tell you this too. The sin of sodom was inhospitality NOT gayness.The new law of Christ is to love God and love thy neighbor. When will you love us enough? How much more persecution do we have to endure? There are countless stories and testimonies that will never be heard because of gay people who were killed or took their life from the depression. Not accepting us fully as we are encourages us to live pretend lives and marry and live secretive lives that harm our partners. The amount of bi men and women in the church and even pastors who are closeted is through the roof. All living DL on the down low lives. Work with the reformation project to make all churches affirming. Far too many live in fear that their children will turn out queer. This is proof that homophobia is sin and is rooted in fear. Queer christians are the remnant church and we are bringing revival to the world.
When someone says "Clearly Jesus would agree with me", all the red flags go up for me.
100%
LOVE how Preston and Sean find common ground, disagree at times, and go back and forth. Such a great picture of having healthy dialogue.
Hey you 👋🏿💛🫶🏿
That's retarded it's not debatable its a sin grow a pair
Is it dividing the church or exposing false teachers?
Exposing false teachers like Sprinkle.
Great question!!
Exposing. No question.
Bingo
Most definitely the latter, @MamaBear-mg1ux.
Perhaps I'm too simplistic but I cannot accept that Jesus would meet me in a lie.
Update:
I've been reading the responses and I'm in agreement that Jesus could meet one in the lie but then He calls them out of it. He would not stay in the lie with me. Now that might take some time but ultimately if I chose to continue in the lie then I would be in rebellion. That could be dangerous for my soul and certainly would not be evidence of acknowledging the Lordship of Christ.
There's a difference between a lie and a delusion. And there's a difference between accepting something as true for someone and accepting something as objectively true.
He wouldn’t. We are to repent from sin not live in or marry it.
I think what he’s saying is that from their worldview they are not lying. They are referring to gender identity when talking about themselves not biological sex (gender identity being the social script/role and internal identification). Conservatives tend to see biological sex and gender as the same thing, while progressives tend to see them as different. From a worldview where sex and gender are different you can technically be telling the truth about yourself. However, an essential and important conversation is if sex and gender should be separated.
If Jesus can't meet you anywhere than he aint Jesus.
And where is that demonstrated in Scripture? @@NC-vz6ui
I can't get around the idea that in the name of compassion or trying to reach them with the gospel, we affirm a lie that is damaging to them.
Even if I put aside the idea that it is not telling the truth about what God says in his Word, Sean is exactly right that we are harming them as an individual human being to not correct a destructive lie that they believe. I cannot see that as loving in any circumstance. We are reaffirming their worldview rather than putting the brakes on it and making them think about it.
The pragmatic question Preston asks about using it as a way to continue the relationship seems like saying we should not share the gospel or share anything offensive with a person and lie to them so that we can then share the gospel. When it is the gospel itself that is the power of God for salvation. Even if I did not believe what the Bible said about how God made everyone male and female, I still could not lie to a person about their gender identity out of care for them.
That is definitely not what he saying, I have gotten to be very clear about the Gospel and my viewpoints on a biblical world view of male and female only and God's design of marriage be between man and women only, with multiple gay friends simply because I was careful to offend and turn them off of relationship with me. I am not afraid to let the Gospel offend people, but as much as possible I try not offend to give the best chance for the person to truly accept the Gospel, by not offending them in other ways. I think this is where Preston is coming from. I have seen this approach be much more affective in reaching people than the former. I would also like to know how many Christians with these strong opinions actually gay friends have they engage with and are trying to reach them?
Preston uses two words that I think are important to understand. Affirming and accommodating. Just using someone’s preferred pronouns is not affirming, but it can be accommodating. Preston references Paul accommodating the Greeks by using a Zeus reference, but Paul certainly not affirming Zeus as a god.
@@randyletourneau3430 I am trying to find where Paul referenced Zeus, but I can't. Can you tell me where that was? I completely disagree with this dichotomy, even if this was in the Bible. You are assenting to their worldview by affirming (or accommodating, if you prefer), their pronouns. You are both lying about who they are, and in so doing, you are supporting their self-destructive ideology. That is not loving. They need to be lovingly confronted with the truth. Where does Paul or Jesus either affirm or accommodate lies?
@@biblicalworldview1 When Preston and Sean are discussing Acts 17, they talk about when Paul was talking before the Athenians and he used a phrase that, to the Athenians, would have meant Zeus, but Paul used it to point to Jesus.
And accommodating is very different from affirming. When you affirm, you agree with the person you are talking to. When you accommodate, you are simply removing obstacles to being heard without agreeing. It is not being confrontational when you don't agree. It is not purposefully communicating something that will make the listener turn away or not arguing something they say that is wrong in order to keep the dialog going. Have you never heard someone say something that you thought was untrue and did not respond to it because of whatever reason? Or do you decide to point out everything that everyone says that is wrong in every conversation? We can all decide to accommodate those seeking Jesus in order to not push them away. That is exactly what Jesus and Paul both did and Paul said he became all things to all people to win some ... he tried to accommodate.
How about simply leading with love and then when you’ve established relationship with them, maybe you can talk more deeply about what’s going on with them.
Whether you think it’s a lie or not, it someone to their core believes something, we need to figure out the reason before we go trying ti fix it. You not “affirming” it isn’t going to make them feel differently about themselves. You think you’re the first person to tell them they aren’t what they say they are?
Share the gospel. Affirm them as HUMANS, and then maybe you can have the other convos. Just my two cents.
Jesus NEVER lied to anyone to win them to himself. Ever. That is completely against the nature of God.
I simply avoid the issue by not using their pronouns at all.
Actually, you just did 😜
Well you may have just used a pronoun. 😂
@@davidmortensen5709 LOL yes. But this is just in general conversation with them.
It’s dumb that RUclips puts a link to a group opposed to conversion therapy in the “information panel” under this
It's trying to warn gay and transpeople from being harmed psychologically by discredited practices.
well considering the damage conversion therapy has caused, I'm not surprised.
Putting it in an information panel implies that this video was promoting conversion therapy. It was never even mentioned.
they're known to do that in gaming videos that mention conversion therapy as just like a passing joke. RUclips is just like that, and I don't mind
Whenever one of those things appears you know they're talking about something that the censors deem wrongthink.
Thank you, Preston and Sean. Excellent conversation. These are tough questions. I wish my fellow Christians would listen to one another as well as the two of you did!
These issues are not "dividing the church." They are dividing the wheat from the tares and the sheep from the goats.
well said @bethezebra!
I think this is painting with a bit of a broad brush. There are certainly some true believers that haven't figured this out that may find it necessary to offer push back on unnecessarily harsh believers that do not compromise on the truth.
I would add the 1 Corinthians 13 factor. Love is patient, kind, etc. and it "rejoices in Truth."
Exactly
@@bethezebra In a way you don't know, but will surprise you.
Jesus walked in truth. Paul walked in truth. They would NOT have used preferred pronouns. The Bible says we're to walk in spirit and truth.
This is a problem with eternal consequences. We need to love people enough to not pander.
I am tired of this make believe crap we are living in. F pronouns. We are either male or female nothing in between.
How exactly is it loving to, when someone respectfully asks you to use certain pronouns that make their life a little easier, for you to say "nope, I refuse to hear you and acknowledge what you feel and show any amount of what you would perceive to be kindness, instead I'll be the 1000th person to tell you that you're just a sinner on their way to hell?"
Thank you Sean. I regularly listen to both you and Preston and I appreciate the tension you both help me hold. May God continue to strengthen your friendship!
Glad to hear, Jay!
I am glad that people are having conversations again ,especially about this.
If you don’t speak to and listen to each other, how can you gain understanding?
My faith doesn’t crumble .
Free speech is vital.
Great discussion! Really encouraged by this discussion and really got me thinking! I’m glad you invited Preston to have this conversation about his controversial views rather than talking about him and critiquing him. This form of discussion actually helps us find clarity to both views instead of straight up downplaying the other person and name calling them. Please continue to do more videos like these! Appreciate the work you do to help educate us. God bless you and your ministries.
Great video. Great conversation.
My one disappointment is that y'all never got to the conversation about the sinfulness of SSA. To me, this is THE question - the one that has made other Christian leaders label Preston a heretic. Would have loved to hear some good conversation on that topic.
To get into the topics to spicy for RUclips, they should cover the reason that most people are turned gay. Hint: the majority of cases have to do with abuse not nature.
Jesus didn’t accommodate the woman at the well. She identified as an unmarried woman. He addressed that issue by speaking the truth in love.
Appreciated the conversation and the cordiality. My views align closer to Sean, but seeing a conversation modeled was the most helpful thing here.
I think there should be a conversation about how many of the people were molested as a child and the harm it caused, especially with vulnerable children stuck in a bad home life !
Yes these are some ways we become hurt. Jesus is how we are saved.
Interesting. I actually think that Acts 17 goes against what Preston says. I mean think about this. Paul is using the same term, “God”, as they are. But rather than validating how the Athenians were using it, Paul is correcting them by telling them how the term is supposed to be used. This is the opposite of what Preston is saying. He seems to imply that Paul was encouraging their current misuse of that term.
Whenever Paul accommodated to his audience, it was always to correct their false notions, and not to validate them.
Fracturing the church? Maybe that's true superficially, but it might be more useful to say it's revealing the church (and the non-church).
The actual truth
Big fan of both Preston and Sean! I'm excited to listen to this insightful conversation.
Ditto. I don't necessarily agree with every single thing, but I've definitely learned from both of their ministries.
You need better heroes.
@@F_Cad How do you know who our heroes are? LOL
@e.m.8094 The two above in this RUclips obviously. 🥴
@@F_Cad Can you quote either one of us saying that, or are you assuming? (you know what they say about that, right? 😉)
I feel like the pronoun issue is more akin to someone’s wife asking, “do I look fat?” I don’t know very many men, or women, that hold to truth in those instances.
Yup, this for sure! It's supposed to be about being kind to ppl who are struggling, not about going against some kind of objective truth...
Listening to Sprinkle I was thinking about the following. Is it being helpful to a person who thinks that he is Napoleon to acknowledge him as "Your Majesty"? Same goes with "my pronouns". Playing along might seem kind but is it? Here's another hypothetical to ponder. A young woman, 25 years old, 5' 9" and weighs 80 lbs thinks that she is fat. She wants liposuction and a prescription for diet pills. Should we play along and give her what she wants? Let's expand the same hypothetical. This same young woman believes that she is a man and wants her breasts removed and a hysterectomy and a prescription for testosterone. Should we play along and give her what she wants? How is that response helpful? Reality is objective. There is no "my reality" that can be imposed on the rational world.
None of those analogies are valid to compare to gender dysphoria, fwiw. All of these imply that they are believing a lie about themselves. That's simply not the case for trans ppl. They are acknowledging something true about themselves to the world, only for the world to call them mentally ill or making up their own reality.
If a woman is 80lbs and thinks shes overweight, she believes something objectively wrong about herself, no doctor would support her. If you think this is the same for trans ppl, you don't know what you are talking about; I strongly suggest you actually talk to and get to know a real live trans person, so as to better understand their actual experience!
I was trained to be a nurse's aid and they told us to treat dementia patients with agreeing with their imagination of seeing people or thinking a deceased person is still alive. is this accommodating? or affirmation?
I think it’s accommodating, but it’s also in a different category than gender issues. A person whose gender identity is non-binary/different from their biological sex is generally capable of understanding the claim that those things are untrue and the difference between right and wrong, whereas for a person with dementia, they’re not necessarily capable of making those distinctions and to try and force it would be legitimately distressing.
Horrible comparison since trans people are aware they aren't physically the opposite gender. Just imagine waking up in the wrong body. Maybe it's a delusion, maybe your brain is wired for one gender and your body is the other. Either way you know there is a mismatch and people aren't seeing something you don't see. In fact you are seeing more. It's more about arguing definitions at that point on what you truly are unless there's some sort of scientific way to resolve what's going on in your brain.
It's dementia. When we agree with dementia patients, it's agreeing with a delusion. Agreeing with name changes or pronouns is agreeing with a delusion. Simple.
I believe it is categorically different. The difference is that the delusion in a dementia patient though wrong, generally doesn't have a moral or sinful component. Also, if there is little to no chance of correcting the dementia patient's misunderstanding, there is no upside and quite a downside in attempting.
Was any of that training from a Biblical perspective? Here we are talking about the Biblical perspective of how to reach the lost with God’s truth.
40:00 Preston's statement here goes against his own position. Paul is actually correcting their incorrect definition of God, not adopting their use of the phrase and word theos.
Preston's position is that we adopt their definition of man or woman for the sake of reaching them. It's biblically indefensible. Paul and Jesus were quick to correct. They never paid lipservice to ungodly ideas.
Hi Sean, good golly Miss Molly 😂 this was a hard one to digest and wrap my head around, there again Im a just granny who loves your channel.
I’m honored you watch, thanks!
I learn so much from you. You are so smart and kind 🥰
I pray for all People who are struggling with gender identity!
Thank you for this video, Sean! This is a topic that definitely needs to be addressed
37:19 - Is there a time we affirm something someone is not? I believe there is. I am caring for my loved one with dementia and his internal reality often does not match actual reality.
Some days he tells me that someone was just at the door when they were not and it is better for him if I just accept that as his narrative and move on. I don’t indulge him in it, but I don’t try to argue him out of it, either.
Other times, he tells me about something that happened and I can’t understand it, but he needs meaningful interaction to feel human, so I ask him questions - even though I have no idea what he is talking about. I am indulging his delusion, even if I don’t understand it.
And then there are times when he thinks he is in danger when he is not; in those moments, I assure him that we will make sure everything is okay.
I think the difference is mental capability and whether indulging the delusion is going to ultimate lead him to a better outcome. I will always try to find the path back to reality for him, which often looks like subtly changing the subject, but there are some moments when I just sit with him in his delusion.
Interesting example.
I agree we can sit with people who may harbor mental delusions, but is that the same as affirming their delusions? Seems close but quite different to me.
I have probably listened/watched over 500 videos/podcasts about transgender issues. My son is currently transitioning. With almost all the detransitioners stories (mostly non-christians) they have recommended to not use pronouns. They stated that it was not helpful and it lead them deeper into the delusion. They appreciated those that did not affirm their new gender identity. I think it is more harmful than helpful.
I actually stopped seeing my Christian counselor of almost 3 yrs because she said I was being unloving for not calling my son by his new name.
I don't know what to say because the current evidence is that detransitioning is rare. So if the assumption is it's a delusion you could be actively harming them. If I was in your position I'd try to learn the science as well as I could because ideology can just be flat out harmful if you get the facts wrong. Personally I'm not religious and I'm pro gay/trans rights but I do have hesitancy on certain issues because I want facts and not ideology to be the guide. Sometimes we don't have every relevant fact but at least having the research as a baseline is good.
@ That is incorrect. The activists are keeping the detransitioner stories out of the media. Like I said I have been learning about this issue for 5 yrs and I have heard all sides of this conversation. I am aware of the studies on both sides. I use the word “delusion” because that is the word the detrans use.
You are spot on, paula
I find Preston to not give direct answers. He generally claims complexity as the answer. I don’t have clarity on his theology after listening to him for 2 hrs. I do think he elevates personal experiences and tends to use language to preserve relationships. Language matters and words have meanings.
Who adjudicates that meaning?
"use language to preserve relationships" Yup he's most definitely motivated by preserving relationships, I suspect he has a lot of pressure he needs to sort out what he's going to do with. Things are always messy when friendship and love are involved.
I appreciate Preston Sprinkle a lot. I find it so odd that some want to label him a heretic because of disagreement over secondary issues within the LGBT argument, when he should be viewed as an ally.
Absolutely agree with you, Patrick!!
@@clarkemorledge2398I don’t think lgbt is a secondary issue because of how it is impacting the western worlf
I am suspicious of Preston sprinkle because of the impact he’s had on some of my family members. He may mean well, but he may just be sneaky. Something seems off about him.
It's not secondary. It's explicit approval and covering for sins.
No, he’s twisting scripture and a false teacher.
These conversations are definitely helpful, informative and I appreciate your approach and ministry, Sean.
Great dialogue. God bless you both!
I love the long format!
Thank you Sean and Preston! As a believer who works in public (middle/high school) education, I really enjoyed listening to this conversation.
Preston is way off on the issue of gender, they are biological realities, male and female genetically! Gender is a wedge to divide and confuse people.
It can’t divide and confuse you if you learn humbly and thoughtfully, and the can articulate your biblical beliefs in a truely loving way.
Preston agrees that there are only two genders and only two sexes and that a woman is an adult female human. Maybe give another listen.
Is it ok to lie to accommodate an individual’s delusion in order develop a potential relationship with them?
Truth without love is mean and love without truth is meaningless.
@@lauramikow2381
This is what gets you cut off from friendships with trans people. You see their delusion and a refusal to recognize their deeply held belief is seen as a rejection of them.
They are the people Jesus told the disciples to dust off their feet and move onto the next house.
No. Giving in to their delusion doesn't stop there. They take and demand more and more until you say no, then you are cut off. It's an appetite that is NEVER satisfied.
If they have dimensia, why not let them think they are a blind train conductor in 1870's France? 😅
If he is unwilling to be corrected then there's not really much conversation can do. If he is willing to be corrected then I like to ask him why that particular identity is important to him and how it forms his world view. Those so openly hostile to the truth aren't beings you should spend a lot of time around, demonic or human.
I dont know who this guy is but the bible clearly says what will happen to homosexuals and other sinners. They will not make heaven. So this man can say all he wants but the bible does not lie.
Watch on, he agrees. It's more to what approaches should someone use when communicating with them.
Is it possible to refer to our transgender folks as friends? I've never offended anyone by referring to them as friend.
This was awesome!!! More interviews like this. Christian channels often become echo chambers and I love seeing Christians respectfully disagree.
Great conversation!
Do we actually believe that we are more just and compassionate than God?
He knows and loves our children, siblings, friends, neighbors more than we do.
I cannot imagine distorting God’s word or character in to accommodate my sin or anyone else’s . I don’t think that is loving. Believe me, no parent wants to be up against this current culture, especially where their child is concerned.
Jesus was about truth and compassion. I'm pretty sure he would gracefully point out that God created man and woman and if that wasn't understood he would get more direct.
It's kind of disappointing how many times Preston had to explain gender dysphoria to Sean. You're not affirming that they are not their biological sex by using their pronouns. Trans people know what their biological sexes are. The pronouns are tied to their own identity, and that is not a matter of truth or fiction. It's just a matter of whether you want to be charitable or not.
Except there ARE Trans people who claim to be what they identify as. "Transwomen are women" and that guy on Trevor Noah who said "I'm made from biological stuff. I'm not a cyborg. My drivers license says female. So I am, in fact, a biological female."
On an unimportant side note, removing the male from the volleyball team doesn't mean your team would have beat that team. It would have been easier to beat them but doesn't mean they would have.
Hi @SeanMcDowell. Based on this interview and Preston's conclusions, my question is whether Preston Sprinkle is a heretic since Rosaria Butterfield has called him one. What do you think about that?
Preston Sprinkle is not a heretic
@@annlowry9841 i'm a heretic :). Its actually pretty cool. there's even a video game called heretic and its also totally sweet
What were her reasons for saying it? I mean, I agree with her, but I'm wondering why SHE said it?
@@annlowry9841How so?
Since they fundamentally agree on their theology of man and woman and marriage, why would one be a heretic and the other not?
This isn’t dividing the church. It is separating the goats from the sheep!
What if identifying as a “gay” Christian is a stumbling block for other believers? That alone is enough reason to steer away from identifying as a gay believer or even utilizing the term as a potential port of entry when engaging with non-believers. Moreover, how do you think the vast majority of people define the term “gay?” This seems pretty straightforward to me. Great show!
Preston on pronouns: Language is flexible, so I can use pronouns to reflect someone else’s stated internal feelings even if I disagree with their worldview.
*Notice how he didn’t say, “even if their worldview is wrong”?*
Sean: Names have that flexibility, but pronouns don’t.
Preston: But language changes over time with culture-so it’s fine.
*Language is supposed to change over time naturally with culture-not be forced to change because some people have an agenda! People with that reasoning would have no problem with Newspeak.*
Would Jesus or Paul use preferred pronouns? No, but they also wouldn't use a smartphone or upload videos to RUclips for the same reason. They had no such concepts in their culture.
This is where reading your Bible is important. Paul was all about spreading the gospel to as many places as possible. So, if technology was available at that time to spread the gospel through other means, might he have used it? Maybe so. Was Paul also in his epistles very careful about correcting the various churches when they deviated from the truth? Yes, this was extremely important to him. So, would he have engaged in affirming deviations from the truth today? I highly doubt it.
@gtf5392 If you want to take statements made in Paul's letters and extrapolate a general principle from them to apply to issues facing modern society you are definitely free to do that but that's not the question that was asked. The question "would Jesus or Paul use preferred pronouns" makes no sense. If you instead wish to ask "Can we use the writings of Paul to try and apply a principle that can help guide our decisions today in a completely different culture and time than those writings were intended for?" then that's a different question.
Did Paul "adapt" his methodology/message in order to not create unnecessary obstacles to certain groups? In Acts 15:19-21 James tells Paul to include a few elements of the Law in his presentation so that the ones who had been raised on Moses wouldn't have to reject the gospel immediately.
Paul didn't consider eating meat sacrificed to idols as sinful, but he was willing to treat it as so for the benefit of others.
Is treating something that is morally acceptable as though it were unacceptable comparable to treating something unacceptable as though it were acceptable?
I'm not arguing in favor of this, I'm just thinking through it.
I don’t think denying reality with your words is very truthful. I would just avoid saying a pronoun. Just say their name.
Which eventually becomes very obvious you are doing so. You can say the confused, malicious, or self-serving individual's name but it starts sounding very awkward in conversation. Basically there's not way to interact in a group setting without it coming up.
I don't see what's wrong with having a deconstructor speak no matter his other views. I mean we disagree with the deconstruction on the outset, right? So obviously we'd have other disagreements....?
Preston sprinkle needs to do some actual research because his characterization of the LGBT movement within the first few minutes was wildly off.
What part of his characterization do you disagree with?
In God there is neither male nor female, those who are questioning their gender identity could be in a perfect headspace for gaining a new identity in Jesus Christ. My pronouns are saved and Child of God
Sorry, only could stand watching the first half an hour of this, it seemed like a mealy-mouthed marathon.
Lots of hoops are being jumped through to shoe horn one ideology to fit another ideology. It's silly.
I would have liked to see Sean draw out Preston on the fact that he specified *unwanted* same sex sexual attraction as a result of the Fall.
Edited to add: standpoint theory alert! Not sure why Preston would apply that to everything except the Bible. What’s true is true, regardless of whose mouth speaks it.
I wouldn't say LGBTQIA issues are dividing the church, so much as they are helping reveal who the sheep and goats are. Not everyone who visits a local church building is a member of Christ's church.
I really appreciate this video! I disagree with a lot of what Preston says, but I do think he is very graceful and presents well his view - albeit I don’t quite think some of the logic in hermeneutic is always working or consistent.
I love a good faith conversation with respect and grace to one another.
Regarding those calling themselves a “gay Christian” it is ontologically identifying with a sin - I’ve never heard anyone say “I’m a porn addicted Christian,” or “I’m an adulterous Christian” and it seems odd to me.
However thank you! I love the in person dialogues, and really enjoyed this! ❤
I think we need to prioritise truth and speak it in love - and the arguments of using pronouns too so we don’t scare people off is exactly what I’ve heard churches say “we can’t preach about hell it’ll scare people off - just talk about love” and it’s not being fully honest and truthful - and I think missioogical defence isn’t a good one when you’re not speaking truth. I could be very wrong, but just thoughts as I am watching
Seems less of a moral issue with homosexuality when adultery by remarriage is over looked all the time and Jesus taught directly on the subject and adultery is in the Ten Commandments which can’t be said about homosexuality. Just ignore it like you do with Jesus own teachings on adultery by remarriage!
It’s not ignored. Sin is sin.
@ and hypocrisy is hypocrisy
chastity, with the exception of procreation, is a highly valued virtue in most churches. the discussion should not be about same sex attraction it should be about chasity. before about 1890 the word that was invented by germans and added homosexuality into our vocabulary was pedophilia. those that wrote the bible disliked the greeks and romans and thus the pedophilia involved with those societies. it took almost 2000 years to turn that dislike into something more general and it pushed many away from the church.
I don't need to be an expert of linguistics to say that he/she pronouns are used in an objective sense by common culture.
He is not a "pronoun" that can be contextually understood to talk about a female.
"He is not a "pronoun" that can be contextually understood to talk about a female."
Wrong.
ex: That driver didn't use his turn signal.
In this sentence "his" can be understood as a male driver or a driver of unspecified sex aka male or female.
Ever heard the phrase give an inch, take a mile?
1:29:36 and right there, that disgust Preston expresses toward what he derides as "conversion therapy," proves the point you were just making, Sean, that the culture disproves of exploring change in sexuality, thereby cementing "gay" as intrinsic to identity. Preston can use linguistics all he wants, but the fact is he thinks just like the world when it comes to the innateness of homosexuality. His Side B approach offers no real insight or help for those seeking sexual integration, and that's why.
To that point, see how quick he is to give other Side B types like Wes Hill the benefit of the doubt. But whenever he speaks of ex-gay ministry or therapy for SSA, he's quick to mock or condescend.
The gender woke thing is bout power. Nobody disputes people's experience makes them tuned to different things and ask different questions.
Femisinsm excludes as an enemy the western traditional culture no matter who or what gender a person is. The biblical writers never had these experiences or beliefs from either the feminist or the modern western cultural apologist.
A homosexual has been made a political identity - it's gone way beyond an ontological descriptive. It (a gay person in the modern sense) is completely alien to the bible, they didn't have Marx or Hegel filling the biblical writer's heads. They had people who read Enoch and 2nd temple lituriture so reading the bible with a deliberate "critical lens" is a fallacy and interpretive crisis.
I agree with Sean on names. If I'm just meeting you and all I know is your name, there's nothing else to go off of. So I can refer to this person as their new name but I don't have use their so-called preferred pronouns. But I also have other info on this person in terms of their outward physicality.
I'm fine with using whatever name someone wants me to use. People can change their name. I'll even avoid using a pronoun they don't like but I won't use she for a man or he for a woman. That's where I see the line for me, to cross it is to actively lie to someone.
I feel it’s different when you’re meeting a trans person for the first time. You only know them as they introduce themselves. So you’re right, you don’t have much choice. It’s the issue when you witness the person’s change.
When Paul quotes a Greek poet and uses the term "God" in a way that doesn't match his audience's understanding of that word, his intent in using that word still matches reality. "God" means Yahweh creator regardless of what his audience understood that word to mean.
The situation I have the most trouble with is using the natural pronoun for a person in a group context. Since the group has affirmed a certain pronoun which may or may not be reflective of the individual do I use that to ease communication? Also that individual may outwardly appear to be of one gender and that appearance is false.
Similarly with the "gay" shorthand term. It's fairly common parlance to mean a general overarching class of people. There's not an English word for ungendered 3rd person singular, unless I want to use 'it', which attacks the individual's "Made in the image of God" status. English doesn't have words for all the concepts and perversions of the day so the question is if I should be repeatedly verbose each time I refer to such a concept or if I should use the enemy's language.
It seems that people who hate on Preston from the extreme end often let their pride influence their ability to think clearly. Sean just gave a masterclass on how to push back reasonably. It seems very obvious that Preston is an ally, though his views may not align perfectly with orthodoxy, and I believe he would acknowledge that as well. The focus of this discussion is undoubtedly secondary; he has consistently reaffirmed the majors. If people still can't comprehend at this point, it is, Lord, forgive them, for they know not what they do 🙏🏽
Preston brings up anecdotes a lot. Which doesn't refute his position but more begs the question: do we address this on an a case by case basis?
Let's say someone smokes pot or drinks to excess: do you immediately address those sins or let the spirit convict them?
On the other hand, you wouldn't *endorse* that behavior.
On the...other hand, is viewing yourself as the opposite gender a *sin* or just incorrect? Would we feel the need to tell a non-believer they must admit that 2+2=4 to be a Christian? Well, again, we probably wouldn't *affirm* that 2+2=5 but this belief isn't necessarily *sinful*...
Nice conversation.....But what did it accomplish? Is an LGBTQ person (A believer) saved or not? Isn't salvation really the ONLY point here? How about we adress that next time?
Some how a lot of the pain and suffering was missed in the back and forth...
Hmmm. It often is.
In terms of the argument of whether to use pronouns or not. This is not a blanket statement issue, as we heard from the testimonies its clearly a case by case review. Is the Holy Spirit telling us to use or not use the pronouns, if it feels hard but right then you know the correct course of action. Some Christians will use the wrong preferred pronouns to cause arguments and make themselves feel superior and others will avoid pronouns just to avoid confrontation. It depends on the person, the relationship and whether you are going to witness to them or not. Then pray and listen to the Holy Spirit whether it is a difficult task or not
My question to those who are taking the position sex and gender are separate "entities" with sex being biological and gender being internal identification: Is it possible to be a female male or a male female? If a biological male identifies as a female, then would it be accurate to describe him as female male? Trying to separate gender and sex makes no sense in the Biblical worldview, does it?
Hello Sean I love your work, are you ever gonna address how Calvinism also divides the church? Thanks 😊
Nope, that’s much more of an in-house debate and discussion (as interesting and important as it is) than sexuality is.
I am grateful for this conversation. Thank you. Question: Is SSA viewed differently from other lustful appetites that are surrendered and no longer desired, like drinking, overeating, sexual promiscuity, masturbation, pornography? Is there freedom from SSA lust? Seems SSA is always referred to as current or desired and not past tense even when proclaiming to be a Christian. When personally, my experience (sanctification process) of withdrawing from the world and drawing near to God has taken past sinful desires away. They no longer have the pull or craving as they once did. Is there something I'm missing?
excellent conversation and chewing on this already
At 39:21 Preston says that Jesus did not address the pronoun topic. And of course, he did not address the issue itself. But that is the case with many issues.
The real question is what is the reasonable moral implication from the norms of creation that he does teach.
In this way Jesus does answer the question.
A Christian is going to strive to use language that matches the creation norms and is going to opposes social language movements which undermine or wish to eradicate the norms that Jesus says are put into reality by the creator as physical ontological realities.
Trans ppl are not undermining or seeking to eradicate creation norms. You made all of that up.
My name is Jery and I've met women with that name aswell... I've even met some boys and girls named "Alex" or "Cameron" so yeah..
1:32:00 sean doesn't know enough gay people. Some are really into being gay, some aren't.
Sin is sin
Thought about the word “identity” I think a lot of people might use it more to mean their “brand” and less about an ontological state.
I watched the whole debate. While you two did a good job with certain issues, I felt like the underlying premise, that homosexuality is unacceptable in God's kingdom, was never questioned. This is why the conversation will never move forward. In the ancient world, two men (or women) could never live in society peacefully as a committed couple. It was an absolute impossibility. So scripture was addressing a narrow band of homosexual acts, based on an imbalance of power. Today's world is different.
I have close family who are gay. I know they are not choosing a 'lifestyle' but rather have been built differently from the start. God made them, designed them, as gay individuals. Otherwise they would not be gay!!
How can Christians disapprove of what God made? It makes no sense to me.
God cannot design something that goes against his word. Sin nature is the cause of same sex attraction. God never designed it
Gay marriage or family is no longer a christian vs secular thing. It’s now affirming vs non affirming churches and you guys are pitching churches that will literally teach people God desires them to be alone without romantic, sexual, or life partner connection + no kids or family while the other churches say that’s nonsense, we support you finding happiness in God with a spouse and family. If you guys are wrong I hope you understand how many lives you mislead into a life of loneliness. And yes most all of these people will admit to that loneliness in honesty but it’s a just sacrifice in their eyes - but what if it’s not a just sacrifice - what if it’s cultural stubbornness? All those families which could have been. Think about that.
The pursuit is holiness.
Again Sean and Preston:
While I appreciate this conversation is in good faith and good intentions, I seriously think this conversation misses the whole point of grace in the Bible.
Why are we sooo adamant on sexuality which is a culture war topic today that Jesus rarely references?
Jesus talked the most about money and how to overcome societal boundaries in promoting and spreading love. Why are we not talking about Trump's incoming administration with the most billionaires ever in his cabinet that is going to suck up the American wealth and ruin the economy? And in the process many people's livelihoods? Why don't we talk about the fact that people cannot work at a liveable wage while the Elon Musks of the world reap millions in profit? All of these things and more affect the whole larger population and Jesus calls these things out directly!
But sure, let's discuss why someone shouldn't identify as "gay", meanwhile we are ignoring all the larger systemic issues that Jesus time and time against calls us to unite to take a stand on. If your theology is threatened by someone's sexual identity then that is a very shallow theology, missing the point of grace, love, and restorative justice that we can all work towards as seen in the Bible.
And I know people will say to this comment "you're not a real Christian because you don't take scripture seriously"
And my response is, all I am doing is that I am loving ALL of my neighbors, working to bring peace in my community, and follow the teachings of Jesus. If that makes me not a Christian then so be it. I'd rather follow Jesus in his teachings and love and larger goal of restorative justice than sit around and debate on whether or not identifying as Gay is proper or not.
Again, you're completely missing the whole point of why Jesus came in the first place: to restore love, peace, and justice to those under the boot of empire.
Have you even read the bible? Jesus did not come to overthrow the Roman Empire. The gospel is not about money. You have made your own version of Jesus and decided he agrees with you on everything. He didn't talk about LGBT issues because they were not issues in his day. The Jews already knew homosexual acts were wrong and men were not pretending to be women. You shouldn't worry so much about whether the world loves you and focus on being obedient to what God has said through the scripture.
Holiness takes precedence over love.
This is said anytime someone opens their mouth about LGBT and Christianity. Talking about it is not singling it out. The Bible is clear on its stance and when there’s a huge movement straying away from truth it’s important that we stand firm, as Christian’s, on truth. It’s being talked about so adamantly because it’s such a big issue in today’s society.
Part of “loving” people is guiding them in the right direction. Affirming and staying silent on a lifestyle that is unfulfilling and could ultimately send people to hell is not loving. Not saying we should go protest at every pride parade but conversations like this are important and spreading truth will always be important. Especially when a lot of those who claim to represent Christianity today are spreading lies.
@@C1461-l1b Please explain this to me. I have several family members married to their partners of the same sex, have kids who are my cousins, and I have grown up with them and loved them to death. I sincerely believe you can be queer, trans, straight, and be Christian as our faith is nothing to do with our sexuality.
Again, all I am doing is loving all of my neighbors (which does not include trying to point them in a "right direction" so they won't go to hell - for that is not loving at all and disobeys Jesus simply command to love your neighbor with no qualifications to it)
and following the teachings of Jesus. If that makes me not a Christian to you so be it. You can say I am going to hell all you want but we live, die, and breath the same air. I can't stand your theology that is exclusionary and so narrow minded. For it is that exact theology that is currently allowing Christian nationalism to reign over the States.
@@Allen-L-Canada yes. Tell that to Jesus when he tells you to love your neighbor. What the heck is Holiness anyways?
I don't know what the gospel means, especially as regards LGBTQ, but if these issues are splitting the church, it seems to me there's a good chance the church doesn't know what the gospel is either, especially as regards any kind of sinner.
You mean one "half" the church doesn't know what the gospel is. One knows exactly what the gospel is. Hence the split.
@@markrichard3364 No confidence in that.
The Evangelion (gospel) is the news of a new king and kingdom being established. The "good news" is that God loves humans and has made a way to be in communion with Him.
@@stetsonscott8209 I think that if it were expereinced as a strong reality, the emphasis would not be on parsing what people call themselves, how they define it, or in making sure borders hold. If the borders are that fragile, well ...
@rgmrtn The policing has to do with the identity of God. The God of Bible is interested in being recognized, especially as God Most High from among many spiritual beings who also have powers and authorities. People police God's identity because personal relationship is predicates on knowledge (which is why intimacy is called "knowing" in scripture). If people start invalidating personally held convictions over propositions about God's character, one is likely to feel defensive for fear of embarrassment or alienation. It would be like somebody came up to you and said your coffee cup gift for your best friend is terrible because your best friend hates coffee. The problem is you are very sure your friend has written you and said clearly they love coffee. You might understand how people could be defensive.
Take every thought captive. Whats the bible say? It’s a worldview difference. Scripture alone vs a cultural grid in education and popculture
I doubt the creator of the universe cares who you fall in love with or your gender, Jesus said sell all your possessions give it to the poor and follow him, hows that going?
"creator of the universe cares who you fall in love with or your gender" Your phrasing indicates to me you believe everything in the world is as it is supposed to be. Why do you think Jesus died? if you admit evil into the picture then maybe you'd see that every person has things which are not right they must reconcile by following Jesus.
It is especially important foe Christian parents not to accomodate trans pronouns. When they do, it makes detransitioning much harder, if possible at all. I know of 3 people who ultimately detransitioned and are very thankful their parents did not cave to the cultural language that would have fueled the trans deception. I've heard Preston be snarky about people who don't "accomodate" pronouns, but it is not the most loving thing to do. It solidifies the lie in the person's heart and mind.
I really appreciate the discussion. I would identify Preston’s position on cultural flexibility of language at 36:55 to be problematic.
Sean is taking the principled position that there are some aspects of language that are worth fighting for because they do reflect a stable and fixed truth about reality.
Preston is being mislead by the concession that some of language is a construct and subject to change, but then leveraging this into opposing the need fight certain attempts to obfuscate fixed truths in nature. Obfuscating language is morally problematic because the harm done is systemic and wider than the supposed good done for the individual one is trying to accommodate.
We should investigate accommodations that don’t give up this important ground. Use a person’s name. Let them know you care but you need to honor the truth by at least not lying as you understand it. That can be done in a gracious way.
People should object to the changing of the dictionary on certain matters. We should acknowledge that some matters are less important and not every shift in language reflects the attempt to obfuscate natural fixed truths, BUT in the case of pronouns that is exactly what is at stake.
I love Preston’s intention, but his view on the flexibility of language gives up the farm by allowing the flexible aspects of language to erode the need for language to also reflect fixed truths.
The fight over language is worth having it’s an absolute necessity today.
And the children of this world are wiser in this regard than the children of light. They KNOW it matters.
It simply needs to be condemned as sin, anything else is compromise. Sprinkle needs to be sharply rebuked.
Preston Sprinkle seems like a very pleasant person but I can't agree with him re the pronouns and the identity stuff. He has no biblical grounds for his arguments, whereas Sean is very convincing, drawing from the Bible and common sense.
Dividing mainly the PROTESTANT church. There no issue like this in the Orthodox Church.
I'm reminded of the time our Lord referred to a woman as a dog, because of social convention, the time he called his disciple Satan. Perhaps being rigid on this matter misses the point? God help us.
Truth divides. Is God homophobic? Lev. 18:22; Lev. 20:13; Romans 1:18-32.
Sean, please.....please stop talking about us.
I think the conversation was forced upon the rest of us. Like, forcefully.
Who do you mean we kemosabe? What if they instead talked about pornography watchers? or maybe adulterers?
@ Do you think having a same-sex attracted sexual orientation is the same thing as a behavior like watching pornography and cheating on your wife?
@ If your church doesn't want gay people fine. There are churches that allow gays to be members. How about just exclude and ignore and go on your merry way worshiping a book?
@@LindeeLove They all fall in the category of things that Satan twisted from their true orientation. In this case the true orientation is loving marriage as set up by God in Genesis 2:22-24. Since sin entered the world man has been led astray by many twistings of this design.
Funny how people believe in free speech but not free association. Jesus hung out with people that got him accused of endorsing their choices, it's such a foolish idea to criticise you Shaun for speaking at a conference.
Just to be clear, I wouldnt go to the conference because it's not what I'm interested in, but I'm not going to cancel a teacher just for associating with people I don't agree with. The X arguments and factions in Christianity is disgustingly immature in my eyes.
Preston and Sean you should watch the film 1946 and put up a reaction video here
We did this five years ago: ruclips.net/video/noXmiLzbhPY/видео.html
@@SeanMcDowell Thanks for your fast reply Sean. I will watch your reaction video. I am a queer christian. Will be in Atlanta in 2 days for the annual national queer christian conference (side A,B,Y) christians attend. Many evangelical, many agnostics and many deconstructing BUT we all worship together and all love Jesus yes even agnostics. We are open about our mental health. We have strong community and the love we have for Jesus is deep. We are inclusive. Most of us reconstruct our faith and this is a beautiful thing. Please know that I and so many have suffered for years with internalized homophobia and being marginalized and ostracized. Christ was always my strength to get through everything. We mask and hide who we truly are and develop OCD, anxiety and depression as a result. Queer christians are jailed in Nigeria for 14 years even today in the largest African nation, they are killed as of this year by law in Uganda (mixed muslim and christian nation), queers are killed in many muslim nations and there are so many queer muslims who christians are welcoming. This is an opportunity to welcome and usher muslim brothers who are queer yet when christians are homophobic that opportunity is lost.
@@SeanMcDowell You would be surprised how many queer buddhists, hindus, and atheists there are as well who cannot open up to anyone in their family. Many turn to Christ because they see that the west has welcomed at least on a social level queerness. This matters more than you can ever realize. I tried to unlike myself 17 times over this very issue. Over 100,000 Americans alone have undergone conversion therapy. Many of them did not survive. Hitler put gays in concentration camps along with Jews. Portsmouth prison in NH jailed gays for decades just for being gay. America had sod*my laws for many years. How much more persecution do we have to face in our own communities, living lives of complete isolation in the closet. It's a shame that so many churches today even in the most liberal cities like L.A. have exgay ministries and see homosexuality as a demon. The greek words do not mean homosexual. Ask greek people who know the language what they think of those words and they will tell you this too. The sin of sodom was inhospitality NOT gayness.The new law of Christ is to love God and love thy neighbor. When will you love us enough? How much more persecution do we have to endure? There are countless stories and testimonies that will never be heard because of gay people who were killed or took their life from the depression. Not accepting us fully as we are encourages us to live pretend lives and marry and live secretive lives that harm our partners. The amount of bi men and women in the church and even pastors who are closeted is through the roof. All living DL on the down low lives. Work with the reformation project to make all churches affirming. Far too many live in fear that their children will turn out queer. This is proof that homophobia is sin and is rooted in fear. Queer christians are the remnant church and we are bringing revival to the world.