Theology in the Raw - A Raw Response to Andy Stanley and the Unconditional Conference

Episode Date: October 6, 2023

Andy Stanley is a pastor, speaker, author, and founder of North Point Ministries. He recently preached a sermon on how he and his church approaches the LGBTQ conversation, and specifically how they have walked with Christian parents with LGBTQ kids. North Point also hosted a conference called "Unconditional" for Christian parents with LGBTQ kids. A lot of controversy has surrounding both Andy's sermon and the conference. This podcast is my response to both. 

Hello, friends. I want to let you know about a couple of events that I'm hosting on the LGBTQ Conversation in Santa Clarita and then again in San Diego in California. The Santa Clarita event is October 16th and 17th, and the San Diego event is October 19th and 20th. These are two different events. One is an evening conversation where we sort of introduce the LGBTQ conversation. And then the following day in both cities, we do a full day training for church leaders. Again, on the LGBTQ conversation, we dig into theology, relationships, pastoral ministry questions. We hear testimonies from various people. It's a time when we can come together

and think deeply, love widely, dig into both truth and grace in what has become some of the most pressing questions facing the church today. To find out more about these two events, you can go to centerforfaith.com, go to the events link, and you can find all the info there. Again, October 16th to the 17th in Santa Clarita, and then the 19th and 20th in San Diego. If you cannot make it out to California, or if you don't live anywhere near these cities, you can also stream these events live online. Again, centerforfaith.com. Hey friends, welcome back to another episode of Theology in Raw. This is a bonus episode or an extra episode. Bonus makes it sound kind of game showy. This is a podcast episode that is going to

be outside the normal rhythm of Theology in Raw. Typically, I release an episode on Mondays and Thursdays where I typically engage in conversations with a diverse range of thoughtful people. This is going to be a solo podcast where I'm going to respond to Andy Stanley, his recent sermon on sexuality and the conference that North Point Church hosted called the Unconditional Conference. For the sake of time, I'm going to assume you have some knowledge of what it is I'm even talking about here. Okay. If you don't even know who Andy Stanley is or North Point, I have no clue about the conference. I don't want to spend a lot of time, you know, going through, you know, kind of

introducing you to all that. I'm going to assume that you're listening to this podcast with some sort of knowledge of what's going on. And I'm speaking specifically to good faith people who want help in how they should be thinking through all the controversy that is surrounded both Andy Stanley, North Point Church, and the Unconditional Conference. So if none of that is familiar to you or if you're not even interested in any of that, then you could just change the channel. Like, this really isn't for you. I have been getting a lot of people wanting to know my thoughts on it. And I've been, rather than writing email after email after email, saying things that would take a lot longer than email, I'm deciding to just simply record my thoughts on a podcast so that I can point people to kind of a one-stop shop of what I think about it. I've been hesitant about responding for many reasons. For one, I mean, I, my, my, my ecclesiology, my view of the church would almost push me toward not responding.

What I mean by that is part of me wants to say like, what do I care about what some pastor in Georgia is saying about sexuality? Like there's just hundreds of thousands of churches around the country, millions around the world, millions. Yeah. Millions around the world, you know, and like everybody's going to be approaching questions around LGBTQ related questions and sexuality and gender questions. They're going to be doing it their own way and differently. And I'm going to, you know, resonate with some more than others and very much disagree with some more than others and very much agree with some more than, so it's like, what, who cares? You know, like why it's, I'm, um, I live on the other side of the country. Like why,

why would this even be a big deal for people that aren't part of this person's church to care about? And of course, the response is, well, no, this is Andy Stanley. This church is huge. It's super influential. And his voice is reaching millions and millions of people. And I'm like, well, to me, that might be an ecclesiological problem that we have created an evangelical culture that creates celebrities out of pastors that have a lot of people that attend their church on typically Sunday morning, or maybe they're involved during the week or whatever. To me, that's an ecclesiological problem that sort of creates the need or desire to respond to those kind of influential people. And this is not,

nothing I'm saying here is trying to be negative toward Andy or the size of his church or whatever. I'm just saying, yeah, the fact that the evangelical church creates celebrity-like voices out of people who pastor mega churches, to me, I think that there is an ecclesiological problem there. So that's been one of my main hesitations. Another hesitation is that out of people who pastor mega churches, to me, I think that there is an ecclesiological problem there. So that's been my, one of my main hesitations. Another hesitation is that, um, I, I really despise the evangelical pileup and my main reluctant reluctance has really been contributing to some kind of pileup, you know, where you got critique here, critique there, and critique, critique, and it just, it just piles up. And all of a sudden it just becomes this, you know,

moment in evangelicalism that lasts about five seconds until we wait for somebody else to pile up on. And I've also been a victim of being piled up on. So I know how it feels. And part of me is like, nobody of you that are piling up on me are taking the time to understand what I'm trying to say, or you don't know me, you don't know my birthday, you can care less about my kids or my likes and dislikes or my walk with Jesus. And it just becomes a big pileup. So I've been reluctant about becoming yet another voice in that pileup. So some of you are like, so why are you responding? Well, first of all, this isn't going to be a contribution to that pileup Um, in fact, you're going to get whiplash during my response. If you're here and you are looking for a red knee, red meat to, you know, further condemn Andy Stanley, you're not going to find it. So,

um, I know there's some of you listening that are, that are looking for that. And, uh, you're, you're, I mean, keep listening, grab whatever soundbite you want, take in context, out of context. Like I can't control how people are going to use this. Um, so, but, but yeah, if you're, if you're just looking for, you know, uh, 17 reasons why Andy Stanley has gone off the rails, you're not going to find it here. Um, or if you're looking for, if on the other side saying, looking for another kind of eye roll at evangelicals getting, you know, triggered over Andy Stanley and, you know, see another just homophobe that doesn't care about helping gay kids in the church. Like you're not going to find that here either.

Um, you're going to find, yeah, I, I'm, I'm going to try to give a, um, thorough, hopefully nuanced, um, hopefully well-rounded, honest response to, again, both Andy's sermon, which I listened to, and the conference, which I did not attend. I'll come back to that. And that's going to curb my response because I don't respond to the things that I don't know about. So my response to the conference will be more limited because I wasn't there. Now there's a perception of what you see on the website, the speakers that were there and kind of like big picture, 30,000 foot thoughts that I'll have on, on the, the, what I know about the conference from looking on from the outside in. So, and, you know, going back to the ecclesiological problem, you know, while part of me is like, this is an ecclesiological problem that people feel the need to respond to a pastor in Georgia if they don't even go to that church or even live in the state.

Yes, I think that's an ecclesiological problem. But on the other hand, I just, it's like, this is the world we live in. So the fact is, North Point and Andy, they are playing some discipleship role in the lives of many people outside of their church and outside of the state. And that's just the fact of the matter. So, you know, when I get loads of emails as I have from pastors saying, you know, this has affected our congregation, our leadership, or wondering how to think through this because North Point has been influential in the lives of the people that we are shepherding. So what is going on at North Point isn't just affecting North Point. That's just the reality of the evangelical world that we live in. And I will also say, I guess I have been pretty,

well, I've got mixed reviews of the responses that I've read so far. Some of them have been, I think, uh, good. Um, others have been okay and others have been terrible. I thought, so I would like to hopefully offer again,

a more nuanced response. Let me also, I'm going to get in here, get into the pros and cons here in a second. I'm coming at this issue with very little knowledge of Andy or North Point Church. I think I've read a total of maybe 20 pages of an Andy Stanley book. I've maybe listened to a total of about maybe 10 minutes of his speaking. In fact, the sermon I just heard from him was the first full-length sermon I've ever listened to from Andy.

I have no ill will, no negative views of Andy coming into this, no positive views. He's a name that is obviously very recognizable, but it's not somebody that I have a lot of background with. Like no beef to pick with him, you know, nor any kind of like, oh, he was a hero. And now I'm like, so saddened by what's going on. Like there's, there's really none of that coming into it in the last like two years. I do feel like there has been, you know, I feel like every six months or so, like he flares up and, you know, something, some controversy surrounding what Andy said specifically around LGBTQ related questions flares up online. And I have looked at some of those, you know, two minute clips of sermons or whatever. And in most cases, there's one in

particular, I forgot the name of it, so I won't, you know, go into detail, but there was one in particular that swirled the internet several months ago and everybody's all up in arms. And when I listened to the clip, I'm like, well, first of all, what is the whole sermon? What's the context? And second of all, what is he trying to say here? And I was like, you know, I don't know if I even disagree with what he's saying here. I think it's actually really good. He's being provocative. He's pushing people to think.

He's pushing people to love. He's pushing people to get out of their comfort zone, to stop using lazy, broad brush phrases, you know, like homosexuality is a sin. Like I'm with Andy. I don't think that's a helpful phrase. What do you mean by homosexuality? You mean somebody who's same-sex attracted and dedicates her life to celibacy for their whole entire life out of allegiance to Jesus, who is still attracted to the same sex? Like that person isn't within the

category of homosexuality. Is that sin to, out of allegiance to Jesus, devote your life to celibacy? No, I don't think that's sin. Well, that's not what we mean by homosexual. Well, then be more precise. Like I love it when Andy challenges imprecise, broad brush phrases, lazy phrases that just create this distance between you and the actual conversation. So all that to say, some of these soundbites I've seen people critique in the past, in most cases, I've been like on the side of Andy, like, come on, like what's the best faith interpretation of what he's saying here? And then having said that, there are some things like, ah, but Andy, I think you could be a little more clear here. I think maybe the way you're presenting this is

unnecessarily inviting some of the critique that you're, that you're getting. And part of me is like, ah, you know, I, I haven't been immune to that. Sometimes I, you know, say stuff that is more provocative than clear. And, and I don't, and maybe that. Sometimes I say stuff that is more provocative than clear, and maybe that's not always right too. I'm not saying that because I do it, then it's therefore right. I'm saying I would be a hypocrite if I critique people for maybe erring, I think is actually how you pronounce it, on the side of provoking people to think deeply rather than being clear. In the last several years, though, I have really tried to discipline myself to be more clear. Clarity is kindness. Clarity is kindness. And I also, and I'll get back to this later,

really want to avoid any perception of doing some kind of bait and switch, kind of not being upfront with what you actually believe for the sake of kind of wooing people into your way of thinking things. So, and I'll come back and address that later. So I want to begin with some positives and then I'll begin with some negatives, maybe. So positives and then critical evaluation of some things that I have either questions about or that I don't agree with or that I maybe have what I would see as concerns or even that word kind of just triggering to me concern. I'm concerned, but like things like, yeah, I wouldn't do it this way and here's why. Okay. So let's begin with some positives. Uh, first of all, I do want to focus on the sermon that he gave. I believe it

was last, was it last Sunday or the Sunday before it was recently sermon where he spent almost an hour, um, addressing some of the controversy around the conference, the unconditional conference, which was a conference for Christian parents of LGBTQ plus kids. And the sermon was addressing basically some of the criticism, clarifying some of their beliefs, giving a backstory for people that weren't aware of it on North Point's approach to these questions. And again, this just shows how much our mind and heart can be shaped by soundbites, by headlines, by critiques. Going into the sermon, I already had read some soundbites, seen stuff online, yada, yada. I was expecting something different in that sermon. See, there we go. When I listened to the sermon, I was amening almost everything

Andy was saying. If you haven't had a chance, if you're interested, I'm not saying go listen to it. Like I listened to the sermon from your pastor. Okay. And I don't, I never want to push people to listen to sermons outside their local church. But if you are interested, listen to the full sermon with good faith, hear what Andy is saying. And I'm going to say, I'm going to publicly say I would affirm. I mean, I didn't do the exact math. 90 to 90% of what Andy said, not only affirm, but like, amen, amen. Oh my word. This is so good. This is what the evangelical church needs to hear. Yes, yes, yes. That's me. Ooh, I could finish that sentence. Oh, I sound like you finished my sentence.

I mean, I won't go into concrete details. I'll let you go listen to it. But he was opening our evangelical eyes to some of the spiritual realities of LGBTQ people being raised in the church. I mean, he was doing what I've been trying to do for almost the same amount of time. I've been in this conversation for about 10 years. And he said about 10 years ago, he had parents coming to him with gay and lesbian and trans kids. And he was like, gosh, we need to help these parents work through what can be a really complicated relationship.

And so they created care groups at the church, and they were diving into this conversation on a pastoral level for over a decade. And hats off to him for doing that. He shared stories, some really moving stories that are similar to many of the ones that I've shared in talks that I've given on what it's like being a kid who realizes he's attracted to the same sex. And then, you know, we'll pray, God, take this away, take this away, take this away. According to one study, I think it was 96% of gay kids when they realized they're attracted to the same sex, pray to God or a God or the gods or a higher power, please take this away, please take this away. It can be a very traumatic experience for a adolescent raised in a conservative environment to be attracted to the same sex.

And they bear that traumatic experience. And I think Andy even talked about this for sometimes, I think on average, about three years by themselves. That's a psychological weight that I think goes underappreciated in evangelical church. And then add to that the largely negative messaging that they hear from the church on anything related to LGBTQ. We need to boycott this, boycott that. We're not going to drink Bud Light anymore. Not going to shop at Target. We're not going to do this. Bad, bad, boycott. No, no, no, no, bad, bad, bad. And then you're here as a 14-year-old kid wrestling with same-sex attraction or experiencing

same-sex attraction. Well, at that time, they typically are wrestling with it. I know sometimes that word can have negative connotations, but most 14-year-old kids who experience same-sex attraction in the church are wrestling with it. They're wrestling with their faith. What does this mean for me? How can I become straight? How can this go away? Can I have a same-sex partner who's going to walk with me, who's going to help me answer that question? And what does the Bible say? And this blog says this. That's just a lot for a 14-year-old, 15-year-old, 16-year-old, 13-year-old kid to bear. And Andy did a masterful job helping our hearts connect with our minds.

our hearts connect with our minds, at least cultivate some kind of empathy and compassion for someone who has had that experience, which is literally millions of people, LGBTQ people who are raised in a church. 83% of LGBT people, according to one study, of LGBT people, according to one study, 83% were raised in the Christian church in America. It's funny, Andy actually quoted that same statistic. He said 86%, but that study that he's referring to, I think it's got to be the same study, the one by Andy Marin in the book, Us Versus Us, 86% is LGBT people were raised in a religious environment. So I control for the 2.9% of that population that was raised in a non-Christian environment, typically Jewish or Muslim. So that's why I say 83%, not 86%.

So yeah, I'm listening to Andy's sermon, and I'm like, this is so good. And I was actually a little disappointed because I know that, well, we're going to get to some of the critiques that I have. I'm like, this is such a shame because there's so much good in this message that will go unheard because of some of the things Andy has said, or maybe it's with the conference that people just can't get on board with. And so they simply toss out the whole thing. And evangelical Christians have gotten very good at the binary, at the either or, either you're good, is he good or is he bad?

If he's bad, then everything's bad. Is he good? Then everything's good. Don't you dare critique him. And it's unfortunate that people who need to hear that message the most simply will close their ears because of either somebody they respect wrote an article to critique Andy and said he's, you know, departing from biblical Christianity. And so they won't listen to anything Andy says. They won't have anything positive to say because, you know, oftentimes our tribalistic instincts will tell us that if our tribe says he's bad, then nothing can be good. And I just, I despise that kind of binary way of thinking in evangelicalism. There is so much good in, again, I can only speak to this sermon because I listened to it a couple of times, once all the way through another kind of spot listening to make sure I was understanding certain points, especially the ones that I maybe disagreed with. I want to make sure I got understood exactly what Andy was saying. So that's my big positive is a sermon.

Okay. What about the conference, the unconditional conference? So again, I wasn't there. All I can do is speak to what I read on the website, what I know about the speakers, and I guess piecing together some things about, you know, being in this conversation for over a decade, you kind of just pick up on things. Okay. Um, implications. Um, and so I will be really clear on maybe concrete critiques I have and other things that are just more of my opinion. Like here's kind of what I would be nervous about with certain things, but I, I mean, I don't want to speak. I don't want to get beyond my skis, um, on things that I don't know. I wasn't at the conference. I did, I did watch, um, uh, Sean McDowell and Alan Schleman from, um, uh, well, yeah, they,

Sean McDowell and Alan Schleman just released a couple of days ago, a, um, an hour and almost hour and a half, uh, dialogue about all this and Alan, um, who I really enjoy. I think he, he, well, Alan was there. Alan did attend the conference. Now I, I just, I really don't like to go on secondhand information. So I'm not gonna, um, I'm not gonna sign off on what somebody else said who was there. If I wasn't there, if I didn't read the book, I'm not going to judge the cover. Okay. So, um, so I did watch that. I think it was helpful. If what Alan said is accurate, um, then I would equally have some more concerns.

But again, I'm going to hold off on some of that simply because I personally wasn't there. I thought Alan was very, um, gracious. Um, he didn't come with ammunition. In fact, he highlighted some things that were positive. He was not afraid to speak positively about things Andy has said or done, or even things at the conference, but he did, I think, very graciously and very humbly raise some concerns about what he did hear or didn't hear at the conference. Primarily, I'm going to... at the conference. Okay. Um, primarily I'm going to, um, so all that to say, while I'm speaking positively of this whole thing, I can't say a whole lot about, I do have more concerns about my limited perception of the conference than I do positive affirmation. I guess that, you know,

the fact that somebody is putting on a conference to help parents of LGBTQ kids, that alone. Okay. Hey, hats off to you for trying to pastorally care for parents. This has been a big part of our ministry at the center. We have produced resources for parents of LGBT kids. We've gone about it differently, but we have tried to step in. And so very few people are trying to step into this. This is a huge pastoral need in the church. Obviously caring for the same-sex attracted LGBTQ kids or people in the church. Maybe it's not obvious to some of you. It's obvious to me that that's a huge need in the church. But on top of that, caring for parents with kids that identify as LGBTQ, that's a huge, oftentimes neglected need in a church.

So, yeah, I guess my positive thing with the conference is it was at least an attempt to do that. So hats off to you for attempting to do that. Okay. Let's get to some critiques here. And as somebody who is often critiqued, myself, I am sensitive to bad faith readings of what I actually said or meant. Okay. So I'm very sensitive to that. So some of you might think I'm being too generous. Some of you might think I'm being too critical. I don't know where you're coming from, but just that's whenever I critically evaluate what somebody said and I critically evaluate it from a distance, I just, I do want to err

on the side of, I want to take the best interpretation of what was said. So I'm going to try to do that, try to do my best with that. Okay. My main critique with the sermon was really with some of the theological statements said at the very end of the sermon. If you listen to the last 10 minutes, please don't just listen to the task. I shouldn't even have said that. Yeah. Don't listen to the last 10 minutes unless you listen to the whole thing. Personally, my critiques were with some of the things said theologically in the last 10 minutes.

At the very end of the sermon, he gave three theological statements, kind of a summary of what he believes, what the church believes. Number one, honor God with your body. The Holy Spirit lives in you and your body is how people know what you believe and where you stand and your behavior through your body is to exemplify the goodness of God and the grace of God and the love of God. This is a quote from the sermon. This is sure. Yeah. Yeah. I agree with that. I don't know too many people that wouldn't disagree with that. It does feel a little vague to me. Like, what is that? I could say, honor God with your body. Somebody else can say, honor God with your body. And we can have very different interpretations of what it means to honor God with your body, but whatever. Okay. It's, I don't disagree with honor God with your

body. I'm just like, I don't, I kind of shrugged my shoulders a little bit. So, well, yeah, I mean, sure. Number two, don't be mastered by anything, not by porn, sexual addiction. Don't be mastered by another person. Yeah, I agree with that. I don't know anybody who would disagree with that. Again, they might define what it is to be mastered by something or somebody. I don't know too many non-religious people who would disagree with that. I don't know anybody who says, no, it's really fun to be mastered by something or somebody. I don't know too many non-religious people who disagree with that. I don't know anybody who says, no, it's really fun to be mastered by something. I think most people just intuitively know that that's not a good thing. Okay. Number three, his third theological statement, and I'm going to quote here. So he says, number three, the old fashioned one, don't sexualize a relationship outside of marriage.

That is so old fashioned. He says no sex before married. Uh, if you're not married, I mean, who even teaches that anymore? And I think he raises, he says, we have always have always will. We're not going to blink on this. So that good. Yeah. I mean, I, I, I assume North Point church would believe that. And yes, that is old fashioned in the broader culture. Um, and it's even becoming more old fashioned, even is old fashioned in the broader culture. And it's even becoming more old fashioned even in some evangelical spaces. So good. Yeah, I agree with that. And then he goes on, but so far he hasn't really said anything about specifically same-sex sexuality or marriage in particular, but he does. Right after this third point, he does go into

talk specifically about same-sex sexual behavior. He says this, and I quote, Sex is for married people. Along these lines, we affirm all three of the Apostle Paul's statements about the topic of same-sex sex. Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6, 1 Timothy 1. He references this. And we affirm exactly what Paul says about this. In other words, what the apostle

Paul called sin was sin then, and it's sin now. Now, okay, this is me. Okay, so end quote. I think a lot of people... Where do I start? I know a lot of people who are affirming, and when I use the phrase affirming, I'm referring to people who affirm that God can bless a same-sex sexual union and declare it to be marriage. Affirming of same-sex marriage. I know a lot of affirming people who wouldn't disagree with anything Andy has said here. Because some people say, well, okay, so he, okay, he said it. He believes in traditional marriage. I'm like, technically he hasn't. Like this, to say we affirm exactly what Paul says about this. In other words, what the apostle

Paul called sin was sin then, and it's sin now. The question is not, do we affirm what Paul called sin? The question is, what did Paul call sin? Again, many affirming writers I know will say exactly what Andy says here. Please hear, I'm not saying Andy is affirming or whatever. I'm just saying this isn't as robust of a statement or as this statement doesn't necessarily affirm a traditional sexual ethic, a historically Christian sexual ethic. Because here's what I mean. There's a debate about what Paul is even calling sin here. Was he calling pederasty sin? Older men having sex with teenage boys.

Was he calling same-sex sexual exploitation sin? calling same-sex sexual exploitation sin, like what James Brownson or Matthew Vines or others would say, or Justin Lee, who spoke at the conference. I mean, Romans 1 is not talking about, this is what some people would say, that Paul's not even talking about consensual, adult, monogamous, same-sex sexual relationships. He's talking about sexual relationships where one person is dominating another person. So again, I'll read the statement again. We affirm exactly what Paul says about this. In other words, what Paul calls sin was sin then and it's sin now. So what do you think Paul is calling sin? Is he calling sin to adults who are consensual, who fall in love, who don't have sex before they get married, and then they are declared married by the state in a same-sex sexual union, declared marriage by the state?

Is what Paul says, Does this, his critique include those kinds of monogamous or let me say consensual same-sex sexual unions? I, I maybe Andrew would say, yeah, yeah, yeah. That's what I meant. And my best faith reading is that it was just kind of, he was maybe more vague than he was trying to be. Or my maybe less good faith reading is that he's using language deliberately to not necessarily exclude an affirming interpretation of scripture. Okay. He then goes on to describe marriage. And for me, this is, if you've listened to me for more than five seconds, you know that my biggest thing is like, it's not Romans 1, it's not 1 Corinthians 6, it's not 1 Timothy, it's not Leviticus 18. It's not the so-called prohibition passages. It is the simple question, what is marriage? So when people say, yeah, I believe

all sex should be within marriage. I'm like, okay, that's great. What's marriage? What do you mean by marriage? So that was really what I was looking for. And I'm so glad he actually went into it. But again, there's some, well, let me just read it. Okay. So then he says, so this message is the same for everybody. Sex is for married people, Andy says, okay? Regarding marriage, and this feels weird to even say this, just make sure everybody knows where we are. We talk about marriage or we talk about and teach about marriage the same way Jesus and the apostles did. Every instruction in the Bible regarding marriage references or assumes a husband and a wife, a man or a woman. So biblical marriage,

biblical marriage is between a man and a woman. We've never shied away from that. We don't change the words in order to not offend people. Again, so unquote, that was Andy, you know, his words from that sermon. Again, so here's my response. I know few affirming people who would disagree with anything in that statement. Again, I'll say it one more time. I'm not saying Andy is affirming. I'm saying this, the wording here is not technically the most precise wording to convey a historically Christian view of marriage.

When he says every instruction in the Bible regarding marriage references or assumes a husband and a wife, a man and a woman, that word assumes is doing a lot there. I mean, honestly, this is a classic affirming argument. I addressed it in my book where I addressed 21 affirming arguments. This is, I think, chapter 12 or something, which talks about this, what did the biblical writers assume? Well, of course, yeah, 2,000 years ago in a Jewish world, of course, they assumed marriage was between a man and a woman.

They also assumed marriages were arranged by the parents, that women were the husband's property, that polygamy and slavery were okay. And if your wife couldn't get pregnant, then you could take a concubine like in Genesis 16 and have sex with her to produce an offspring. So what is biblical marriage? I'm inside the argument right now. So using the, argument right now. So using the, you know, again, when you say the biblical writers assumed a husband and wife, they assumed man and woman. And so biblical marriages between a man and a woman, the question is not, did the biblical writers describe marriages as between a man and a woman, but did they prescribe transculturally for all time and all place that sex difference is and always will be a part of what marriage is? I mean, that's the ethical question. Now, again, here's my... What am I

saying Andy's trying to say here? I don't know. I don't know, Andy. I'm pretty sure you're not going to listen to this. You know, I'm pretty sure – you know. I don't think Andy really cares what I think. So if you were to – here's two options that when – like Andy's wording here, both with marriage and also with same-sex sex, you know, either these are innocent slip-ups or maybe just imprecise, you know, and that's, everybody uses imprecise language. And maybe if,

you know, the 1% chance Andy's listening to this, maybe he would say, yeah, yeah, yes, what you said, Preston, that's what I meant. That's what I meant. You know, that when I say biblical marriage, I mean, yeah, I mean, this is not just described, that this isn't just inside the Bible. The biblical writers assumed heterosexual marriage, but yeah, yeah. I mean, this is also prescribed for all people of all time. And yes, of course, I mean that all forms of same-sex sexual behavior, even between two consensual adults who fall in love, who don't have sex until they join in a union that the state has called marriage, in love, who don't have sex until they join in a union that the state has called marriage. Even that sin. Yes. That's what I meant by that. Okay. That's, I'm assuming. Okay. Let me assume.

I'm assuming that that's probably what Andy meant. He was maybe just a little imprecise. Or, and I'm not saying this is true. I'm saying this is another possibility that only Andy can answer. Or he carefully worded it this way because it sounds very traditional. Most traditionalists are going to say, oh, okay, good. He still believes, you know. But it also doesn't close the door on affirming same-sex marriage today. Neither statement about same-sex sex nor his statement about marriage technically closes the door. That's a bad phrase. technically says that the thing we now call same-sex marriage today is outside the bounds of God's design forever, transculturally, of what marriage is, and that that would be declared

sexual immorality according to a historic Christian view of marriage. Like nothing in his words would necessarily go that far. Okay. Another critique I have on, again, this is at the very end of the statement. He says, many gay people at his church, many are convinced that traditional marriage is not an option for them. So they commit to living chaste lives. And for many men and women who put their faith in Christ, they just decide, okay, I'm just going to buckle down. I'm just going to bear down. I'm just going to, you know, be by myself. I'm not going to have a family. And I assume when he says not have a family, he means biological family, not the even greater reward of a spiritual family, according to Mark 10, 29 and 30. I'm going to be sexually pure. And many, many, many, many do that for long seasons of life.

And for some, it's for a whole life. But for many, that is not sustainable. So they choose a same-sex marriage, not because they're convinced it's biblical. They read the same Bible we do. They chose to marry for the same reason many of us do, love, companionship, and family. This again is, so unquote, this again is, it's a classic affirming line of reasoning here. I mean, this is almost a quote from like Matthew Vines, Karen Keene, and other affirming writers who use this kind of reasoning about singleness, sex, and marriage. And they'll say, yeah, some gay people, they're committed to celibacy. And yeah, okay, that works for them. But for a lot of us, it just doesn't really work for us.

So I guess I'm just, I think there's an anemic theology of singleness that is underlying Andy's portrayal here that singleness is all about just, you just buckle down and bear it. And you're just by yourself, you're lonely, you're alone, you have no family and just grin and bear it. I mean, not only is that a classic affirming line of reasoning, it's also straight out of the handbooks of purity culture. That singleness is about being alone. It's a drudgery of life that you just bear down and try to get through. But having a romantic parlor, that's where true human flourishing is. If you don't want to be lonely, you get married.

Like that is very, I just, very purity culture-ish. married. Like that is very, I just, very purity culture-ish. So again, he didn't do a sermon on, here's my theology of singleness, you know? So again, I want to, I'm just giving my kind of impression here. I'm not saying Andy has a terrible theology of singleness. I'm saying the words he's using to describe singleness here, I would, I'm just under impressed with. And I think it's reflective of, of, of many churches in that were nurtured in purity culture. So I, I, in a sense, I don't fault, well, fault. I'm not surprised by it maybe because a lot of evangelical leaders nurtured in purity culture were, were, were, you know, have this kind of view of singleness and marriage. Um, that for many, That for many, it's just not sustainable

singleness. And I've talked about this in many places elsewhere. I think that that just, the underlying problem I have with this is just an underdeveloped anemic theology of singleness and maybe a subtle idolatry of marriage or romantic companionship. Okay. Let me offer some critical thoughts on the conference as a whole with the view that I was not there. So take my words with a grain of salt. I will try to stick to things that are just factually true and offer some thoughts, not try to assume things that I don't know about what was or wasn't talked about at the conference. So number one, the one that a lot of people have been concerned about, the conference. So number one, the one that a lot of people have, you know, been concerned about, you know, the conference was heavily weighted with affirming speakers. Not all, not all. Julia Sudesky has done work for us at the center. She's a

Catholic who affirms a historic Christian view of marriage. And she had apparently gave a breakout, I think, on trans-related questions. And she does – I wasn't there in her, but Julia does great work in this area. So not every speaker was affirming, but most were. Justin Lee – I don't want to name names. You can look up the names or whatever, but there were two speakers who are married gay men. Then you had David Gushy, who affirms same-sex marriage, was there, who gave the one talk that had to do with theology, I believe. And again, I don't even know.

What do you think about that talk? I don't know. Didn't hear it. And so part, okay, part of me is kind of like, whatever. There's lots of conferences that have all affirming speakers or mostly affirming speakers. I mean, you can go to the Q Christian Conference, Reformation Project, whatever.

Like there's, you know, they're affirming. And so they have affirming speakers or mostly affirming speakers. I mean, you can go to the Q Christian Conference, Reformation Project, whatever. Like there's, you know, they're affirming. And so they have affirming speakers. And then there's other conferences like the ones that, you know, we put on at the center that are historically Christian. I mean, we have historically Christian speakers. We're doing a conference in a couple of weeks in San Diego. Yeah, we will have several speakers

and they're all committed to a historically Christian view of marriage speakers and they're all committed to a historically Christian view of marriage and they're also attracted to the same sex or gay or whatever. And, um, and yeah, that, that's, that's, that's who we are. That's, that's this perspective we're coming from. And so we're going to speakers and reflect that and whatever. Then if, if you're doing a conference that's genuinely mixed saying, you know what, um, we have a lot of theological diversity, um, that we're assuming here. And so we're going to have diversity of speakers, then have a more balanced lineup of speakers. Okay. So I guess

here's my opinion is that when you stack the deck in favor of affirming speakers, while giving the impression that, oh no, this isn't, we're not taking a theological stance. To me, it just, it feels, it feels dishonest to me. My opinion. I'm not saying you are dishonest. It just, it seems maybe disingenuine would be the better term. It feels a little bait and switchy to me, which I'm very nervous about. It feels a little gaslighting to me, you know, like, what's the big deal? What's the big, you know, this isn't a theology conference. It's like, well, when you have almost all affirming speakers, that does say something. Okay. Now, to be clear,

the conference wasn't, as far as I know, you know, explicitly denying the historic view of marriage. Like I didn't see anything on the website that says we as a conference, we take a historic view of marriage or we take an affirming view. It just didn't have a theological position officially. And so I don't know if there is any teaching directly went against the historic Christian view of marriage on a doctrinal level. I want to come back to that point by saying doctrinal. I think that's important. But the parenting advice was coming from leaders and speakers, most of whom do not affirm that sex difference is part of what marriage is. Let me say this. Let me say this. This is, again, I'm going to wander off into opinion land here. So take it with a grain of salt. If I was affirming, and I'm pretty sure, I mean, again, it's pretty sure, you know, people who, some of the people involved in putting this on are affirming of same-sex marriage.

Like, I don't think that's a secret that there's, you can be affirming and still be on staff at North Point Church and the people involved in this conference were many of them, all of them, some of them at least are on the affirming side. I don't think that's any news flash to anybody really. So if I was affirming and I wanted to convince Christian parents that being in a same sex sexual relationship is perfectly compatible with following Jesus, that this in a same-sex sexual relationship is perfectly compatible with following Jesus. This is a valid option. It's not sin. You don't need to be concerned if your kid's in a same-sex relationship. If I was affirming and I wanted to convince conservative Christian parents of that, I would invite the exact same speakers North Point did. This is no knock on the speakers. I've spoken with Justin Lee. We've shared the stage together, behind the scenes conversations, very delightful, nice,

genuine guy, amazing communicator. So this is not, if anything, it's a praise of Justin Lee. Justin Lee is, of anybody I know, can convince a conservative Christian that the affirming view of sexuality is, is perfectly compatible with following Jesus. I think he's probably the most, to my, in my opinion, the most convincing person of that. Uh, David Gushy, very convincing theologian, again, very nice guy. I share a lot of common theological commitments as David Gushy spoken on a panel with him. I'm not even knocking like the organizers of the conference because, again, I'm assuming that a lot of them at least are affirming. So from an affirming perspective, I'm going to say, well done. If I was affirming, this is the exact kind of conference I would host for parents. And my guess is this. Okay, here's my guess.

Again, wandering out on opinion limb. I'm going to guess that not a single parent who was already affirming left questioning their beliefs. Nobody can disagree with that. That's just the course. No affirming parent's going to leave saying, man, if this is completely untrue, it's just a guess, I'm going to guess that at least some, if not many, of the non-affirming or historically Christian parents did leave questioning their theological beliefs. Because people say, well, no, no, it wasn't about theology. And this is where I'm going to call BS on this. It wasn't about theology. And this is where I'm going to call BS on this. And this is where I think some of the gaslighting comes in, some of the maybe dishonesty at the best reading, maybe naivete. Don't make it sound like it's theologically neutral. Because stories, in this case, stories of very likable married gay men who say they love Jesus,

these kind of stories are some of the most powerful pieces of theology that exists in this conversation. And quick caveat, I'm not, well, because I specifically use the phrase, you know, married gay men who say they love Jesus. And some of you are going to do to me what I'm doing to Andy, dissecting his language. I'm not implying that they aren't Christians. I don't know their heart. I think the history of Christianity has lots of people, great leaders that we know in the history of Christianity that had major blind spots or doing things that were contrary to historic Christian worldview or ethics that, you know, I don't know whether they're in or out. I'm not here to make a claim on someone's salvation. Okay. Just like, you don't know if I'm a Christian. If you haven't really hung out with me, you know, and spent a lot of

time with me, you know, you don't know if I'm a Christian. I could be a fraud. I have many people in my life that have been mentors to me that have come out as non-Christians, have been fraud, that have all kinds of skeletons in their closet, whatever. So I'm not, I just categorically, I don't like to assume that people I don't know personally are just, they must be a Christian because they say they're a Christian. So that's what lies behind my language of they say they love Jesus. Not implying that they do or don't. I just don't know. So I so I, um, yeah, stories are more powerful, like seeing somebody who is happy, who is, uh, likable, who is fun loving, who, uh, talks about Jesus. Like that is more, more theologically powerful than having somebody like, uh, again, maybe like a Matthew

Vines, you know, give, you know, 18 reasons why the historic Christian view is incorrect. And here's affirming arguments like that kind of intellectual kind of trying to dismantle a certain theological system that, that, that can have an effect on people, but not nearly as much as stories. So I, again, I don't, was this, I don't know. I'm not going to say like this was intentional and I, you know, this I'm, I'm just revealing, you know, what's going on in deep recesses of people's heart. I'm just saying that this is just functionally true that having a bunch of affirming people in same sex relationships, or at least, at least two, you know, um, that is, you can't say, well,

that's not theological. That is very theologically powerful. Secondly, second point of critique, and just kind of the same thing. Like, you can't separate theology from practice. You can't separate theology from parenting. If you say, well, it's just a conference helping parents love their queer kids. Golly, evangelical. Like to me, that does feel either, either that's very naive, um, or it's, or it's gaslighting, obviously. Well, it's obvious to me, not to some people. Yes. We need to have thousands of conferences helping Christian parents love their queer kids. I mean, that's what I literally, and I mean, that's what I do. Part of what I do is creating resources to help Christian parents love their

queer kids more than they feel like they have had theological room to do. So I'm going to push hard into scandalous grace toward your LGBTQ kids within a historic Christian view of marriage. within a historic Christian view of marriage. So I would even say there's going to be points of overlap. I bet there was, I bet. I'm going to assume that there's things said at the conference that I'm like, amen and amen. I would agree with that. I don't think you need to change your theology to do that.

But yeah, I'm going to agree with probably some, if not a lot of what was said at the conference. There's some overlap between how affirming Christians are going to love their gay kids and how not affirming Christians are going to love their gay kids. But how you love will be shaped by your theology. So let me get real specific here. If it is true that a sexual relationship outside of a male-female marriage is contrary to the Creator's design, the one who created us as sexual beings, the one who didn't discover sexuality but created sexuality, if a sexual relationship outside of that design is contrary to our beloved creator's design, then as a parent

who wants to love my kids well, this love would suggest that I would want my kid to live according to the creator's design. That is a significant part of being a loving parent, if the historic Christian view is true. Everything I'm saying there is assuming a certain view of theology. My point here is not even to say that that theology is right and everybody else is wrong. My point is theology does matter. It does matter. You can't just leave theology off the table and then say, we're just going to talk about parenting. I think that's a false dichotomy and either a naive one or a dangerous one. Third critique is, and this does come from, okay, this does come directly from Alan Schliemann's relay of what he heard at the conference. Actually, this did come out in the sermon a little bit too. So I can speak firsthand to that. But I'm also going to assume

that Alan is interpreting things correctly there. And if he's not, then I'll change my view. So don't take this kind of with a grain of salt. But third point, it felt like, from what I could see, that there's a false dichotomy between you have this traditional way to parent LGBT or T kids versus this new way that North Point is doing. I think they even used those terms, like traditional way and new way, as if those are the only two options. Cause then they painted the traditional way in the worst possible light. Like it was borderline, like Westboro Baptist, like, you know, how would Fred Phelps parent his gay kid? And then, and then there's our way, you know, like, I'm like, well, hold on here. Like there's a massive middle ground here where people do believe that sex

difference is part of what marriage is. They do believe that all sex outside of that kind of marriage is sin. Who also want to deeply love and walk with and relate to their gay kid. I know lots of evangelical Christians who hold to a traditional view who like attended, you know, their same sex, their gay kids wedding, their same sex wedding. And some of you might say, well, they shouldn't have done that. Whatever. That's not the point. The point is like, there is like there's a lot of a lot i would say the majority of um evangelical approaches to this conversation are more nuanced than the two options um that andy seemed to present and maybe okay maybe, George, I've only been to the South a couple of times,

you know, well, a few times, but like, maybe this is a by-product of being in kind of a Bible belt culture where maybe, maybe there are a bunch of just, you know, ruthlessly homophobic churches and maybe the way North Point is going about it really is truly like, you know, like the only other option that's different than just, just, you know, Westboro Baptist, you know, like the only other option that's different than just, you know, Westboro Baptist, you know, type approach or whatever. But I guess then I would say, well, there's a big wide world out here that is approaching things in a way that is balancing or not balancing, that is integrating both radical truth and radical love toward your gay kid. Where do we go from here? What should we do? Um, so first of all, I want you to walk away from this, not simply

loading your gun with more ammunition to, you know, say, yeah, that's why Andy's even wronger than I thought before. Um, hopefully that's not what you're going to walk away with. Here's, let me come full circle again and why some of the critiques maybe I haven't been impressed with. Not all, some of them have been good, I think. But here's where I get, again, under-impressed. If you're a Christian leader,

you're a pastor, you're a leader, and you have publicly criticized Andy Stanley without doing the work of caring for parents with LGBTQ plus kids, then I'm just so unimpressed with that. impressed with that. If all you do is simply critique somebody trying to do it and you don't think they're doing it well, and you're not also doing the work, then that's just hypocritical. This is a huge discipleship need in the church. There are so many parents. My inbox is filled with parents saying, my kid came out as gay. My son is now my daughter. I have two queer kids, three queer kids. And I have nobody at my church that is walking with me, is helping me, is discipling me. Or I would feel, you know, Annie even said like, and I agree with him that like when, you know, when gay kids come out of the closet, the parents go into the closet, typically if they're Christian. And that's, the closet is a terrible place to be. Discipleship doesn't happen well in the closet, whether for your gay kid who was in a closet,

is in a closet, or for the parent who now is crawled into the closet. This is a massive discipleship need in the church. So we need to do the work of discipleship addressing this massive need. Both discipling people wrestling with their sexuality, their gender identity in the church, and parents who are also trying to walk with them. This is a massive need. 21% of Gen Z identifies as LGBTQ, whether you like it or not. And that percentage is about the same inside, outside the church. And then you add to that 20%, 21%, loved ones, siblings, parents. This is no longer just some fringe population. It's more rare these days that somebody in your church doesn't have or, you know, isn't or doesn't

have a loved one who identifies as LGBTQ. And when churches are silent, when they're not doing pastoral care for people who are wrestling with their sexuality and gender, and then they turn around and rattle off some critique or forward some, you know, Facebook message and all caps or whatever to their relatives. Like I just have no time for that. So don't do that. Do the work, get educated, uh, cultivate, um, uh, a deep, deep, passionate heart for LGBT people. Sit down if you haven't done so and listen to stories of LGBT people, especially ones who grew up in the church and what it was like. We absolutely need to become agents of truth and grace to help, again, speaking to leaders, help people who are under

our leadership to think critically and faithfully and graciously and humbly through questions around sexuality and gender. Questions around sexuality and gender have become some of the most pressing ethical and pastoral questions facing the church today. Silence is simply not an option. Silence is pastoral irresponsibility. So how do we do this? I have recorded a lengthy dialogue with my good friend Gabe Lyons that is trying to now kind of be constructive on how should we approach these questions. So if you want kind of part two to this, this is kind of part one. This is my thoughts specifically on the conference, on Andy's sermon and whatever. on Andy's sermon and whatever,

Gabe and I are going to wrestle with what do we think is a more faithful way to approach these questions. So if you go to www.thinkmedia.com forward slash gay marriage, I'll put the link in the show notes. You can check out a conversation that I have with Gabe that will kind of take things from here. So thanks for listening and keep loving your kids.

Well embody both truth and grace and a conversation that often lacks both. This show is part of the Converge Podcast Network.