Theology in the Raw - 768: #768 - Where Should Trans Students Sleep at Summer Camp? And Other Questions

Episode Date: December 2, 2019

Questions, questions, questions. Preston is taking another week to address some super interesting questions sent in from his listeners. Where should trans-identified students sleep at summer camp? With the boys or with the girls? Should Christians watch movies with sex and nudity? How should Christian institutions frame their sexuality and gender statements? And much, much more. Support Preston Support Preston by going to patreon.com Connect with Preston Twitter | @PrestonSprinkle Instagram | @preston.sprinkle Check out his website prestonsprinkle.com If you enjoy the podcast, be sure to leave a review.

Should trans students sleep with the boys or with the girls at summer camp? How should Christian universities frame their policies about LGBTQ questions? And should Christians watch films with nudity? I'm Preston Sprinkle, and you are listening another Theology in the Raw episode. Lots and lots and lots of questions about sex and gender in this podcast. I am going to be addressing a bunch of questions that y'all have sent in and sorry for the delay. Some of these questions are two to three months old, so better late than never, I guess. But again, as I said in the last episode, I have been focusing largely on a bunch of interviews of what I think are interesting people, but I wanted to take a couple episodes here and

address some of the questions that you have sent in. If you want me to address your question, hopefully in a much more timely manner than I have taken in this episode, you can email chris at prestonsprinkle.com. That's C-H-R-I-S at prestonsprinkle.com. And I won't spell my name because you should know how to spell my name if you're listening to my podcast. All right. Well, that's off to a weird start. Hey, a few speaking engagements coming up in the spring. If you go to centerforfaith.com, I've got a whole list of speaking engagements that will be rolling out. My spring semester is almost filled up and the fall, fall 2020 is starting to book up right now. So I will kick off the winter, I guess, winter speaking schedule in Edmonton, Canada. Edmonton, Canada, January 17th. Who goes to Edmonton,

Canada in the dead of winter? Well, I do. In fact, this will be my second time at the, um, the, the one conference. And also I'll be hosting a one day leaders forum. I think it's actually called a masterclass. It's sort of, it's like a pre-conference thing at the one conference on January 17th through the 19th is the one conference. So yeah, you can sign up for that. If you are going to the one conference, if you live in Edmonton or if you just simply want to fly up to Edmonton and yeah, visit some ice sculptures on January 17th,

that'd be awesome. February 9th and 10th, I'll be in Orange County, California at Rock Harbor Church and wait for it. Wait for it. Rock Harbor Church on February 10th. And I'll be at, wait for it, Branches Church, Huntington Beach. Branches Church, Huntington Beach.

That will be on February 9th for a two and a half hour evening introduction to the LGBTQ conversation. I'll be at Biola University later that week, I believe February 11th and 12th. March 5th and 6th, I'll be in Northern Colorado for an evening introduction to the LGBTQ conversation and a one-day leaders forum. Also, I will be in Nashville. We're coming to Nashville. Nashville is one of my favorite cities. Yeah, I almost moved there, actually. I don't know if you guys know that. I almost moved to Nashville a few years ago.

I love Nashville. I love so much about Nashville. Most of what I love about Nashville has to do with the barbecue. I'm a huge fan of barbecue ribs. And oh, what's that joint? Oh, Martin's Barbecue. My goodness. A little shout out to Martin's Barbecue in Nashville. You guys are killing it. You guys have an amazing barbecue there in Nashville. And Peg Leg Porker might be number two. And then G's Barbecue in East

Nashville, which is like a little hole in the wall, which has some amazing barbecue that I've only been to once. Whenever I go, they usually run out. And so I did go once with my good buddy, Jay Newman. We got some brisket. They actually ran out of ribs. Why am I talking about barbecue at the beginning of the podcast? So yeah, you can go to centerforfaith.com, go to the events page and check out the speaking schedule. Most of these events, you do have to register ahead of time. So I encourage you to register sooner than later for one or some or all of these events. Let's see. Is that it for the introduction? Let's jump into some of your questions, some really good questions. And a lot of these are just, there's not, I don't know if there's super clear black and white answers to these, but I'll do my best to respond to them.

First question has to do with, well, a youth pastor sent this in from a, I'll just say, I'll keep it kind of vague, a church in the Phoenix area. How's that? I oversee a student ministry team serving those in fifth grade through college. As you might expect, an important part of the programming involves annual camps where our students and their friends spend time overnight at in-state camps, as well as sites outside of Arizona. Of course, at our camps, we provide separate sleeping accommodations for boys and girls. This year, we have a young woman who is beginning, who is in the beginning stages of medical

transition to become a male. And we know that this will become less and less of an uncommon reality and need to be prepared to address in terms of accommodation. Okay, so where do trans students sleep? This is becoming one of the most popular questions I get. You know, I speak on this topic all the time and I always do Q&A and do a discussion time. And, you know, there's usually kind of way, there's just like, there's like seasons where there's certain questions that always seem to be kind of the top five questions. And I would say in the last six months or so, this one is becoming one of the top five questions that I get asked,

largely because there's been an exponential boom in trans and non-binary identities among teenagers today. 27% of California youth, 13, 18, identify as transgender or gender non-conforming. Now, gender non-conforming is kind of a big catch-all category, but there has been a 2,000% increase among teenage males in the UK who are seeking some kind of help with determining what gender they are. I mean, going to gender clinics and seeking counseling for their gender dysphoria. 2,000% increase among males, and there's been a 5,000% increase among teenage females. And we can go to their studies that have been done in Europe, in New Zealand, in America, and it's pretty much in all Western countries, there has

been a massive rise in teenagers identifying as something other than, you know, male or female. So yes, you're right that this is something that is not going to be very uncommon in the very near future. In fact, it's not very uncommon now. So great question. Let me give you, well, let me give you a framework that I've been thinking through. The question is, if we're going to divide students in terms of sleeping arrangements, how should we divide them? terms of sleeping arrangements, how should we divide them? And I guess you could, okay, I guess one of the views could be, you don't divide them. They just, it's a free for all. Everybody kind of sleeps in the same room, changes the same room. That's probably not the wisest decision, nor do I think that's something that youth groups are pretty much ever going to do. So how should we divide people? Let me give you three possible options. Number one, we should divide people based on biological sex, biological sex. This is how we have divided people for millennia. Okay. Virtually every civilization on earth, if they're going to divide people, and I'm not talking about like ethnic divisions or whatever, racial division, I'm talking about like when it comes to male, female, boy, girl divisions, virtually every

society on earth has in a history of mankind has divided people based on biological sex. That's one option, biological sex. Now, another option is gender identity. Gender identity is defined as one's internal sense of self as male, female, both or neither. And thirdly, we can divide people based on sexual orientation. Who are you sexually attracted to? So we'd have all the straight people over here, all the gay people over there, and then the bisexuals can flip a coin. Gender identity, your internal sense of self. So if somebody is a biological male

but identifies as female, then they would go with the females because that's who they identify with. Their internal sense of self is female even though their biology is male. That would be dividing people based on gender identity. And if you base it on biological sex, then you would just put all the biological males in one room, all the biological

females in the other room, regardless of sexual orientation, regardless of gender identity. It does get a little bit more complicated when you have somebody who is going through or has been through gender transition. And that age for gender transition, sorry, sex reassignment surgery, where somebody takes medical steps to present as the biological sex that they identify with. Of course, you can't actually change your biological sex in the very medical scientific sense of the term, but you can present as and look like the biological sex that you identify with. So that does add a bit of a wrench into this whole conversation. Let's look at the pros and cons. So that does add a bit of a wrench into this whole conversation. Let's look at the pros and cons. So if you divide people based on biological sex, then you will,

you could make comfortable, or sorry, you could make uncomfortable or even ostracize those whose gender identity is incongruent with their biological sex. So if somebody identifies as a sex different than their biology, then they would be uncomfortable with those divisions if you base it on biological sex. There's also the problem of those, as I said before, those who are in the middle of or are taking steps to change their biological sex. You also have the problem of sexual orientation. Problem? I don't know orientation. I'm problem. I

don't know. Is it a problem? I mean, some people say it is, some people say it isn't, but if you divide it based on biological sex, males in this room, male and females in that room, you still have the, let's just say tension of males who are attracted to other males who are sleeping with in the same room and changing in the same room with other males. And, you know, again, I'm not saying that that's a problem, but it raises potential tensions and questions and things that we need to think through. So let me say that there is no division that will make everybody comfortable. Because some people say, no, you should base it on gender identity so that you make people who have gender incongruence or gender dysphoria, you make them comfortable. But the fallout of that, well, there's several, I see several problems with basing on gender identity. Number one,

that, well, there's several, I see several problems with based on gender identity. Number one, how many gender identities are there? Facebook says 74, Tumblr says 130, whatever. Several people say there's an indefinite number of gender identities. If you define gender identity as one's internal sense of self as male or female, both or neither, if you make it a really subjective thing, which I mean, by definition, it is subjective and individualistic. I'm not saying that in a negative way, just as in a definitive way, that becomes really difficult. When you have a range of individuals, you will probably have a range of gender identities. Now, of course, well, I shouldn't say of course, I mean, well, probably we'll have most people that will

identify with their biological sex, so there won't be a problem. But I do think there will be a growing number of different gender identities. I mean, where do you put the non-binary people? Where do you put the gender fluid people? Where do you put the pan-gender people? Where do you put the gender F people? F-U-C-K. Should I just say it? I don't know. You said it in your mind, so you swore I didn't. And that's a real category that people have. So, I mean, when you have a growing number of gender identities, I think dividing people based on gender identity becomes very difficult. Also, what do you do if you base the separation on gender identity, would you do when a female has been sexually abused by a male-bodied person? Because, and that's, we're talking like 20% of biological females have encountered some

level of sexual abuse by a male-bodied person. Does a 16-year-old female who's been sexually abused, doesn't she have a right to be in a female-only space where only female-bodied people will be? I'm not saying. I did not say, will not say, and will never say that a male-bodied person who identifies as female is a sexual predator. Sure, some are, most aren't. Some straight people are sexual predators, and most aren't. Okay. I mean, just, just, it is what it is. However, having listened to a number of females who have been sexually abused by a male bodied person there, you talk about a trigger, like a legitimate trigger. I think they do have a right for their own mental health to have a safe space where they aren't forced to share

a changing space or a sleeping facility with another male-bodied person, even if that male-bodied person identifies as a female, and even if that male-bodied person is not a sexual predator. Again, I'm going to say it one more time. I'm not saying male-bodied people who identify as female are sexual predators. I'm not saying that at all. I am saying, and this is just a fact, that females who have been sexually abused by male-bodied people, that can be extremely traumatic, okay? And so those are just, I mean, you know, I think if you base it, if you base the division on gender identity, then that, that just opens up, I think more problems than it solves. Do we base the division on sexual orientation? I think that creates way more problems than it solves. How, you know, sexual orientation is a spectrum anyway. Like, Hey, all the, if you're a one to three on the Kinsey scale,

you go over here. If you're a five to six, you go, you know, if you're a four, you know, come with me and we're going to put, you know, I just, that just seems weird. And I don't even know how that would work. And I don't know anybody that, I mean, just throwing this out as a theoretical option, not that people are doing this, um, you know, but I, yeah, I don't think you can divide people based on sexual orientation, all the same sex attracted people yeah, I don't think you can divide people based on sexual orientation, all the same sex attracted people, your opposite sex attracted people there. I think we just have to live with the tension that some people in male, um, spaces and female spaces will be attracted to the same sex. And, um, you can't, you know, uh, yeah, that's just, it is what it is.

And it's always been like that too. We've always have based division on biological sex and there has always been same sex attractive people. And so we've, we've, we've done it fairly well until now. So of all, well, of the three options, I do still think that dividing people based on biological sex is the best way to divide people. sex is the best way to divide people. So even if a teenager identifies as a different sex or gender, I think for, well, at least if they're not intersex, then they have a clear unambiguous biological sex and they should share changing spaces and sleeping spaces with other people of the same biological sex. I am not saying that solves every problem. I'm saying it creates the least amount of problems than the other options. Now, when I

say biological sex, I'm not talking about, well, I am talking about the external sexed embodiment. I'm not talking about genetics. So for instance, if somebody has androgen insensitivity syndrome and has a Y chromosome and a female body, they're genetically male, but their body is female. Where do they go? Well, they go with other female body people. We've never divided people based on whether or not they have a Y chromosome. Now, yes, scientifically, non-intersex people, Y chromosome people will be male-bodied and non-Y chromosome people will be female-bodied

for most people, non-intersex people. But we still determine whether or not they are male or female based on their embodiment. So when it comes to an intersex person that is chromosomally male, but their body is female, we would say they are female. I mean, socially, practically, we would treat them as a female. Now, I would say the same goes for somebody who has physically transitioned. And here I'm going to think out loud. Can I do that on my podcast? I need to think through this a bit more, but where I'm at now is I think that if somebody has physically transitioned, they have had surgeries, they are male or female bodied,

visibly, even if genetically they might be the opposite sex, I would say they should go with they would, they should go with where other people, the same sex embodiment are sleeping, they're sleeping arrangements. Okay. What am I doing? I'm trying to dance around that. So if you look like a female, you should go with females. Is that too, meaning is if somebody has taken the steps to transition, uh, somebody like the only, the best example I always come up with is Blair White, Google Blair White, B-L-A-I-R-E. Okay. Google Blair White. Um, I think you would be safe if you click on images just so you can see what she looks like. I don't think there's going to be anything obscene there. Um, but you will clearly, you know, and then you answer the question. Blair White has signed up

to go to summer camp. Where should she stay? So you answer that question. Blair White is genetically male. She says she's genetically male. Like she's, she's, I'm biologically male, just science. She, as you will see, she clearly presents and passes, this is a phrase people use, passes as female. Like if you were showing up to a coffee meeting with Blair White and, or a lunch date, or not date, let's not say date, but a lunch meeting with Blair White, she wants to hear about Jesus and you're like, hey, let's have lunch, it's on me.

And we'll meet at Chili's. We'll meet at Martin's barbecue in Nashville, Tennessee. I'll meet you there at 12 o'clock and blur shows up at 1130. She's a little early. She grabs the table and you show up there at Martin's and you say, Oh, I already have a table. Um, I mean somebody and they say, Oh, which table is it? You would say, Oh, it's, it's, it's where that girl is sitting over there. You wouldn't say, oh, it's where that man is sitting over there. It's where that male is. See that male over there? They'd be like, I don't see a male. They would say, you would say there's a female there because she is a female bodied, even though she's genetically male. So if somebody has transitioned and passes or whatever,

like if they are female or male bodied, then I could see a case saying they should go where other female bodied or male bodied people are. I don't think it would be helpful for Blair White to go sleep and change with other males. Do you? Again, you got to kind of see the image for you to understand the complexity here i i probably not going to work out too well so um i i yeah if somebody has taken medical steps to transition they want a good youth group whatever and this right you know i'm not even going to get into the whole like how to walk with this person long term that's not what your question has to do

it has to do specifically with where they go. So, um, if somebody has transitioned, they go with the sex to which they have transitioned to, to which they have transitioned. Um, what do you do with somebody that's partially transitioned? They are a male, but they've gotten breasts, but they still have a penis. I mean, I don't know. I know this is theology in a raw, but in that case, I honestly, I don't know. Let's just, I think this is a good time to sit your youth group down and just educate them thoroughly on sex, gender, transgender, non-binary identities. And I don't know where the easy answer to that is. If somebody is in that kind of in-between transition state, I would hope that they would recognize

that this presents some complexity to where they would go and sleep with in a communal sleeping space. Hopefully they would be able to recognize like, yeah, I understand that I'm not, you know, where somebody would have a difficulty in where I should go. And I don't know. I think that'd be probably a difficulty in where I should go. Um, and I don't know,

I think that'd be probably a case by case basis. All right. Should we close in prayer? No, let's keep going. Okay. Next question. Um, uh, this person says I'm reading the Dutch translation of Genesis chapter two. And this person also has, has read my book people to be loved. two, and this person also has read my book, People to be Loved. You explain Genesis 127 and Genesis 2, 18 to 24. You focus on becoming one flesh and a helper to meet with him. This is 218 and 220. In verse 24, a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves unto his wife and they shall become one flesh. Does this not in itself require male female for a marriage? Yes, it does. The end. I mean, I, yeah, I think that if you look at Genesis 2.24, which talks about the one flesh union in light of 2.23, because you got to look at that transitionary phrase that says for this reason, or therefore

at the very beginning of verse 24, if you've got a Bible, you got to Google open, Google it, look at the verse, whether online or in a Bible, and you'll see that beginning phrase in 224 links the logic of 224 and the one flesh union. It links the logic to 223. And 223 talks about both equality between the sexes and also sex difference between male and female, or in that case, man and woman, ish and ishah in the Hebrew. So yes, the one flesh union requires sex difference. That's what a one flesh union is. It is not simply two consensual humans coming together. It is precisely two sexually different persons coming together. And we know this because Jesus reinforces this in Matthew 19 verses three to five, where he

quotes 224, Genesis 224, and links it to Genesis 127. Genesis 127 says, male and female, he created them. And then Jesus says, well, Jesus quotes 224, therefore, a man shall leave his father and mother to be joined to his wife. And the two, which two? Two humans? No. Male and female, those two shall become one flesh. The one flesh union, syntactically, logically, theologically, biblically, ethically, however you want to frame it, is not simply two humans coming together. It is precisely the male and female coming together in a one flesh union that we now call marriage. I don't think I made it as clear as I should have in People to be Loved, my book, in chapter two. So I apologize for that. If I were to do a second

edition, I would probably, honestly, I'd probably rewrite chapter two. It wouldn't change everything, but I think I would probably make it a bit more clear that when we talk about marriage, the one flesh union that the Bible talks about, we are not talking about a consensual union between two humans that, oh, by the way, we Christians kind of arbitrarily think it should be between a man and a woman. That's, I would say that when we say marriage and we mean the one flesh union that we call marriage, when we say that word marriage, we mean the coming together of a male plus female. That's what marriage means. Next question. I've been listening to your podcast for a while. I have my students read People to Be Loved. So I've come to really appreciate the way

that you navigate things related to Christianity, sexuality, and gender. I'd love to hear any thoughts you have on Christian universities publicly identifying their position on all this and how you might do that if you're in a position of influence in that process. Yeah, I've got loads of thoughts on this. And when I give my one-day leaders forums, my leaders forum talks on sexual, audio, and gender, I go into detail on policy statements. How should you word a statement? detail on policy statements. How should you word a statement? And so it's hard for me to, yeah, it's hard for me to kind of repeat everything on the podcast of how I talk about that. But in general, I focus the statement on the definition of marriage and a clear articulation of sexual ethics. I don't single out a particular orientation.

You know what I mean by that? Like, I don't, I don't, I don't think we should have one policy for gay people and another policy for straight people. And then, oh, this statement that covers the bisexual people. And then what about the pansexual people? What about the fluid people? What about the orientation? There's loads of different orientations. Orientation is having to do with some kind of biologically rooted, not determined, but rooted and largely innate, unchangeable sexual desire or attraction. There's loads of different kinds of orientation. We don't, look, we have one definition of marriage. We have one sexual ethic.

And whatever your orientation is, all people are called to follow that definition of marriage and sexual ethic. Doesn't mean it's easy. Doesn't mean, you know, for some people it's more difficult than other people. And it's not just a gay straight, like, oh, gay people have it hard and straight people have it easy. I mean, our sexual ethic includes really harsh statements, I mean, strict statements about divorce even. ethic includes really harsh statements, I mean, strict statements about divorce even. And there's loads of straight people who are madly in love with somebody else other than their spouse and would want nothing more than to get rid of their spouse, divorce, death, whatever, and marry somebody that they actually desire.

And some people might have a rather difficult and dismal life if they remain faithful to their spouse. There's people that, I mean, I can go on and on. There's sexual difficulties inside and outside of marriage. There's straight people. More and more, there's straight people that are, quote unquote, traumatized because they can't have sex outside of marriage with the person they love. And hey, we're going to get married. It's four months away. And I'm dealing with debilitating anxiety and depression and suicidality because I can't have sex with my spouse. And I mean, there's a whole range of difficulties that cut across the gay, straight, lesbian,

bi divide. All that to say, we have one definition of marriage. So articulate what that definition is and be able to defend it. And also we have, well, then the next question is what is sex and what are the boundaries for sexual expression? I think your statement shouldn't have the term gay or straight or bi or pan or anything in it. You should just say, you know, for instance, marriage is a one flesh union between two sexually different persons and all sexual relationships belong within that covenant bond, that covenant union. God's design is that sexual expression would happen in the context of marriage. And here's how we define marriage, a male and female in a one flesh lifelong covenant

union, period. Like the more you go on and on about specific expressions or aberrations of God's intention for sexual expression, the more you start to kind of single out people, the more you start to other certain kinds of people, and the more you raise more questions than you need to raise. So positively state your definition of marriage, and the more you raise more questions than you need to raise. So, positively state your definition of marriage. Positively state God's design for sexual expression. What is marriage for? What is sex for? We rarely raise that question. How many Christians who believe in a traditional view of marriage, if you say, hey, what do you think marriage is for? How many would be able to give a robust biblical theological statement to that question? Not many. What is sex for? Is it just a

gratification of sexual desires for those who are committed to marriage? Is that it? Is that really? That's why? What role does procreation play in this? We should think theologically about contraceptives. And I mean, there's all kinds of, I think, questions that, I mean, the Catholics have been addressing for years and Protestants, I think, have largely adopted a largely kind of secular sexual ethic, except we add one little footnote, wait until marriage. But like our understanding of what marriage is for and what

sex is for is largely secular. Our one little footnote is don't do it until you get married. But I think there's something more deep or more profound, more gospel centered in a biblical understanding of marriage and sexuality and sexual expression than we often make it out to be. So that would be, yeah. So in terms of sexuality and marriage, that's what I would say. I think every college's policy should really have a robust and clearly defined understanding of sex and gender and what it means to be human. A theological anthropology of male and female sexed identities. And if all that sounds like gibberish to you, then I would highly encourage you to do some good study on theological anthropology. What does it

mean to be human in light of bearing God's image? And also what does it mean to be sexed embodied humans who bear God's image as embodied sexed beings. I think any statement should have a clear articulation of that so that, I think you should answer the question. If someone experiences incongruence between their sex and their gender, Which one are they? Ontologically, who are they? Ontologically, the nature of being. I think that's a super basic question that I think a lot of, well, a lot of institutions, churches, denominations, you know, writing these statements haven't really thought thoroughly and clearly through. If someone experiences incongruence between their biological sex and their gender, let's just say gender identity, their internal sense of who they

are, then which one are they? If their sex is male and their identity is female, are they male or are they female and why? These are basic, basic questions. But a lot of people haven't really thought clearly through it. So I would say a statement should include a really clear, well-researched statement on sex and gender. Next question. Oh, also, so sorry. One more thing with that policy. Any policy that is stating a sexual marriage or gender ethic or whatever should also include a statement about humanizing people, about confronting gay jokes or bigotry or dehumanizing sexual, quote unquote, others, sexual minorities, gender minorities. You can positively state what you believe is true and good and beautiful for

all humans. And yet you should also positively state how we should treat other people who may or may not line up with our quote unquote policy. So don't just make it about orthodoxy, make it also about orthopraxy. How do we actually live this out? Hello, Preston. I'm a lead pastor of a 1200 person church in Calgary, Canada. Just finished reading your book, People to be Loved. I'm going to try to summarize here. So yeah, you go, I mean, to great lengths to say you love the book, but you do have some pushback. And I just, again, I just so appreciate your

posture in this. And I wish everybody can talk like you do and raise really good questions, even pushbacks with the tone that you have done. You give me hope for humanity. So thank you so much. You said, oh, this is you saying, this is you. I'm going to quote you. Okay. Quote, you said, now that the war is over, we can put down our guns and care for the

wounded. And there have been many, many LGBT people who have been wounded. Although I wholeheartedly agree with that last sentiment, I do not agree with the first. To me, the war is not over at all. And the fight over same-sex marriage has, in fact, emboldened the gay activists. And they're aggressively working to legislate what we teach our children in schools, And they are aggressively working to legislate what we teach our children in schools, instruct us in the signage we must place on bathroom doors, the signage that we must place on bathroom doors and lobby to take gay individuals that are called to reach without losing our first amendment rights and our ability to freely practice our faith? Just how do we respond to the anti-Bible,

anti-church, anti-Christ agenda of the gay activists without looking like we are gay, anti-gay ourselves? Great question. And honestly, I, I, yeah, this is, first of all, I receive your pushback and it's a solid one. I've become more aware, not aware, but more sympathetic to the concerns over activism than I was when I wrote People to Be Loved. activism than I was when I wrote People to Be Loved. Now, granted, my main concern is with the ethics and posture of Christians in the church. My main concern is not with the broader cultural debates, okay? I'm not really engaging in culture wars. However, I don't want to be naive to the fact that those culture wars or whatever do influence the way people think, that they do influence what our kids who are public schooled

or even Christian schooled are hearing and learning. So we can't completely, unless you're Amish, and I don't mean that in a negative way, but unless you really remove yourself from society, And I don't mean that in a negative way, but unless you really remove yourself from society, you're going to be faced with cultural ideologies. And I think the church should help guide its people in how to navigate those ideologies. So, um, so what you, your concern is a good, great one. And let me just say, so I, again, my, I don't deny, um, at all your concern. deny at all your concern. I just want to say that my focus in that book was much more helping the church think through its own ethics. But I am much more concerned about some of the activism going on today. And it's not, I mean, you several times say, you know, gay activists. And while some gay people are activists, we do need to make sure we understand other gay people or not.

Not just because you're gay doesn't mean you're an activist. In fact, some gay people, I said this in the last podcast, you know, we have conservative gay people who are not Christians but are politically conservative that are opposed to gay activism. So we can't equate being gay with being an activist. But yes, some gay people are activists. Some straight people are activists on behalf of gay concerns or the gay lobby or whatever. In fact, I would say some of the most militant activists are not LGBTQ, they are straight. And yeah, we do have obviously some militant LGBTQ activists. So I do take kind of a Mennonite approach and you, I mean, you're up in Canada, so hopefully you'll appreciate this, a lot more Mennonites up there. You know,

the way I view Christians living in culture today is we are exiles living in Babylon. And we are trying to maintain our exilic Christian, yeah, exiled ethic that looks, that's going to look weird to our broader culture. Now, every now and then Babylon's going to elect a new leader. Every now and then Babylon's going to enact a new law. We should expect Babylon to value things that reflect Babylonian values. We should expect Babylon to create laws that reflect Babylonian values. We should expect Babylon to create laws that reflect Babylonian values and Babylonian morality, which is going to be very different than an exilic morality. So let's, first of all, let's just not be shocked. Our goal is not to reform Babylon,

but is to perhaps, well, maintain our ethic as exiles living in Babylon. And also maybe we'll even win some Babylonians to the exilic way of Christ, but we're not going to change Babylon. In fact, we're probably going to receive persecution. We might be thrown into a fiery furnace while in exile for standing up for our values. We should expect that. When it doesn't happen, we should be surprised. So, I'm not super interested in fighting a culture war, trying to reform Babylon. And again, I know some people do, and I'm not saying that's necessarily wrong or right. I'm just saying that's not really what I'm into. But, and yeah, I do want to recognize that there is a war happening because Babylonian values do seep into the exilic community. When God allowed Israelites to return

home, a lot of them stayed. They didn't even speak Hebrew anymore. They spoke, home, a lot of them stayed. They didn't even speak Hebrew anymore. They spoke, what do they speak? Aramaic, right? Aramaic or gosh, yeah, I think they spoke Aramaic. Was that the trade language in ancient Mesopotamia? Anyway, so my perspective in these things is radical compassion for the seeker and the struggler and the enemy. Okay. And yet we need to resist and deconstruct destructive ideologies that have enslaved our Babylonian culture. Let me say that again, radical compassion for the seeker and the struggler and the enemy while resisting and deconstructing destructive

ideologies that have enslaved our Babylonian culture. This doesn't mean we fight a culture war, but it doesn't mean, but it does mean that we identify and deconstruct various worldviews that our people, especially our kids, are being exposed to. So I just, I don't, you know, what does that look like? I mean, I could, you know, well, it depends on what specific issue and relationship and topic and situation and, you know, we can get lost in the weeds of what it looks like to play this out. But at first, I think we need to get kind of a good 30,000 foot perspective on this tension between compassion and resistance. And I would say, again, that this is my mantra, if I can say that, when it comes to the whole transgender conversation, because I think

there are people that are just in need of care and love and delight from the church, and we have shunned and shamed our trans or gender dysphoric brothers and sisters. are gender dysphoric brothers and sisters. And yet I do think people who are gender dysphoric or trans identified, some of them, many of them, a lot of them have been captivated or enslaved to an ideology about what it means to be human that is not only unbiblical, but is also destructive. And we need to resist that. Out of love and compassion, we need to confront, resist while loving and caring for and dining with and drinking with and eating with and listening to and loving and on and on it goes. Okay. So compassion and resistance. So I would say in people to be loved, I definitely, I think I hit the compassion side. I didn't so much hit the resistance side, but I will in my forthcoming book on what the Bible says about transgender

and non-binary identities. So, let's get out of the bag on that. Yes, I am working on a book. Okay, last question. My wife and I started watching the television show, television show Outlander on Netflix. You just outed yourself. We started it months ago and then stopped and then started again and then stopped again and then started again. At first we only watched one episode and then turned it off because of nudity and a sex scene. But then we had friends that really liked the show and we really liked the genre. So we gave it another chance. And then you kind of talked about the show a little bit. I've never seen a show. I've actually never, I guess I vaguely heard about it, but I don't even know what it's, what it's about. So, but it does, it doesn't matter. So here, here are my questions.

You say, number one, do you think that it's okay for Christians to overlook or continue watching certain movies or shows with nudity in them because the show or movie has a broader entertainment value or perhaps an educational value? Number two, do you think nudity in a film can be rationalized as art? Number three, do you think our conservative views may not come from the Bible, but instead Victorian standards? For example, in tribal cultures, they would have a very different clothing. Okay. Okay. Great question, by the way.

And, you know, I'll give my perspective. I don't claim inspiration for this perspective, obviously. When I look at a film, I ask two questions, two different questions. Does it contain sin or does it glorify sin? In other words, you know, does it contain sin or does it, if I can say this, motivate me to sin. Those are two different things. Just because a film contains sin doesn't mean that it glorifies sin or even motivates me to sin. In fact, I would say it would be a very dishonest film if it doesn't contain sin. And yet it would be a very unchristian film or unhelpful for Christians to watch if it glorifies sin. Or even if it does glorify sin, are you mature enough to be able to analyze that, wrestle with it,

and respond to the glorification of sin in a very humble yet critical posture? The classic example I often use is the film Gran Torino with Clint Eastwood. Gran Torino is an R-rated film. It contains lots of swearing and violence and racial slurs. Well, guess what? In the real world, we have swearing. We have violence. We have racial slurs.

This is just what it means. This is part of being human. Fallen humanity does these things. So, the film contains sin, but actually the film doesn't glorify sin. Even like the swearing in it doesn't motivate me to swear. It often occurs in certain scenes where it's actually critiquing the people that are swearing. The violence. I mean, the cross of Jesus Christ is incredibly violent. Well, that's a good kind of violent. Well, was it good that the Romans slaughtered Jesus? Theologically, yes and no, right? I mean, of course, yes, he needed to die, but they also killed an innocent person. Like there's all kinds of tensions and complexity with the violence, even in the Bible. So, you know, when I watch, and there's many other films

I can think of, or even the joke or even Joker, the movie Joker, which I just talked about in a podcast a couple of weeks ago, you know, there's violence in the film, but man, that film is so morally compelling and disturbing at the same time. Um, I don't, if I was going to, if I was going to direct that film, I don't think I would change anything. Like I, we just can't look at movies in a two-dimensional way of like, oh, if it contains more than five swear words and, you know, a side boob here and there or whatever, then no, it's therefore bad. Like we need to think, you know, does it contain sin versus does it glorify sin? Those are two very different things. I can give many examples, but what about nudity and sex? Okay. So I'm going to be a little

more. So when it comes to things like violence, swearing, even like witchcraft, I mean, I, in some of the kind of classic examples that turn some Christians off the film, I have a lot more generosity or flexibility when it comes to that. Again, again, when it comes to, does it contain sin or glorify sin? You know, some films that have swearing, I'm like, you know what? That is a necessary swearing scene. That reflects an honest evaluation of humanity in a fallen world. But there's other films when it's just unnecessary swearing, which is like, dude, you didn't need to drop so many, like that's just,

most people don't talk like that. Like that's just, you're just trying to get, I don't know, like it's just not, it's unnecessary and it's almost dishonest. That's another thing. We often don't view films through the moral lens of honesty. Is this film honest? That's an interesting question. Not is it moral, but is it honest? I mean, in honesty, we would say it's moral, but honesty about human nature would again contain sin, right? What about nudity and sex? So here I'm going to be a little more conservative on this. As a guy who like, not guy, gosh, playing in the stereotype. heterosexual guy, in most female nude scenes, for me personally, it is unhelpful for me to watch it, especially if it's like a sex scene for various reasons. One is just a sexual temptation. Another is an inaccurate view

of sex. Sex takes sacrifice. It takes selflessness. It's difficult sometimes. It takes work. It takes love, agape love. And sex is often portrayed dishonestly in films. Well, I got all kinds of examples that no matter how raw the show is, I'm just going to refrain from giving examples. Let me just say, and y'all probably know what I'm saying. I mean, most Hollywood films, it doesn't portray an honest perspective on sex. So it's not just, you know, it contains sex, therefore it's wrong. It's, it's portraying sex in a very dishonest, let alone immoral way. Um, but even sometimes when it is moral, husband and wife, whatever, engaging in sex and, you know, whatever. Sometimes it's a very dishonest

view of sex anyway. So, but anyway, for me personally, it's, I mean, 19 out of 20 times, it's going to be unhelpful for me to view nudity and sex. I say 19 out of 20 because maybe, I don't know. I mean, nudity, like if, um, if you're watching a movie about a war-torn country in the majority world where it's common for females to bear their breasts in a non-sexual way, um, is that, to me, that's categorically different than most Hollywood films that are going to glorify, uh, naked breasts. Um, so that that's going to be, I, I'm not going to be sexually tempted when I see nudity in that kind of presentation because of the whole context is just very different. So yeah, so I don't want to categorically rule out nudity. I guess I will categorize, for me personally, okay, this is just me, I don't think it's really ever helpful for me to watch a sex scene, okay? So that's just me. Maybe for you,

it does wonders for your life, for your moral life. For me, it's just, I just, I can't think of a context where it would be helpful for me to view a sex scene. What do you mean by sex? What if they're making out? What if they're rounding second base, but they don't show him get to third base? I don't know. I mean, I, you know, this is just where we just have to be, you know, use discretion. So all that to say, I haven't seen Outlander. Um, so I can't speak directly to that. And I can't even say that I, I, I keep my, I follow my principles perfectly. Okay. I do fail and don't do it perfectly. Um, but in terms of, if you were to ask me, if I kind of just raw on paper perspective, um, uh, almost all nudity is unhelpful, but some in certain contexts, you know, I think it's not

immoral to watch. But I don't personally see any value in seeing a sex scene. Okay. Thanks for listening to Theology in Raw. If you want to support this community, this work that I am doing through this podcast, you can go to patreon.com forward slash Theology in Raw, if you want to support this community, this work that I am doing through this podcast, you can go to patreon.com forward slash Theology in Raw. I just want to give a huge, huge shout out and thank you to those of you who have been supporting Theology in Raw. I just love engaging with you guys and girls and non-binary people. I really do value your feedback, your input, your support, not just financial support, but I know a lot of you people are praying for me and you reach out to me through

the Patreon platform. And so I just thank you guys so much for being part of the community. I know that you're supporting the show financially, but honestly, and that's super helpful and necessary. And i really appreciate your financial support but i would say and i genuinely mean this you're you're just emotional spiritual um and and friendship support through patreon is really means a lot so if you want to be part of that community go to patreon.com forward slash theology and raw and support the show and you get access for a return for your support. You get access to premium content like monthly podcasts and blogs that I write only for my Patreon supporters.

So, all right. That's about it. We'll see you next time on TheologyNaraw. Thank you.