Theology in the Raw - S2 Ep1132: Responding to Claims about Being a “Heretical Liar”

Episode Date: November 27, 2023

Jared is a pastor in Tennessee. On November 13th, Jared posted this comment on X:  According to Dr. Rosaria Butterfield, What Christian ministries are heretical liars? "Revoice, Preston Sprinkle's Exiles in Babylon Conference sponsored by his heretical Center for Faith, Sexuality, and Gender, and CRU"  @PrestonSprinkle @crutweets That's what she said at  @LibertyU convocation this past Friday. What heresies/lies have they spread? 1) "Same-sex attraction is a sinless temptation, and only a sin if you act on it?" 2) "People who experience same-sex attraction are actually gay-Christians called to life-long celibacy?" 3) "People who experience same-sex attraction, rarely, if ever, change, and therefore, should never pursue, heterosexual marriage." 4) "Sex and gender are different, and God doesn't care if men live as men or if women live as women, because all you need to do is grow in the fruit of the Spirit, as if the fruit of the Holy Spirit can grow from sin." There are several things represented in this post that I have never said nor believe, and therefore I asked Jared to come on my podcast to talk about these errors that are said about me.  Jared’s original post where he agrees that I’m a “heretical liar”: https://twitter.com/jaredhmoore/status/1724124156470444527 Jared’s post where he lies about my ministry, The Center for Faith, Sexuality & Gender, “advocate[ing] for…non-sexual romance, cuddling & kissing, and snuggling in bed:” https://twitter.com/jaredhmoore/status/1724042446223368248 And here is the paper written by Dr. Greg Coles and published by The Center for Faith, Sexuality & Gender regarding celibate relationships (regarding the cuddling and kissing comment above), which Jared and I discuss toward the end of the podcast: https://www.centerforfaith.com/resources?field_product_category_tid=1 Jared’s post where he publicly says Rachel Gilson is “legitimizing gay marriage,” which is factually wrong: https://twitter.com/jaredhmoore/status/1724088931816276476 Here are a few books I’ve written on the topic of sexuality and gender, which clearly argue against the very viewpoints that Jared says I believe:  People to Be Loved: https://www.amazon.com/People-Be-Loved-Homosexuality-Issue/dp/0310519659/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1700630797&sr=8-1 Embodied: https://www.amazon.com/Embodied-Transgender-Identities-Church-Bible/dp/0830781226/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1700630831&sr=8-1 Does the Bible Support Same-Sex Marriage? https://www.amazon.com/Does-Bible-Support-Same-Sex-Marriage/dp/0830785671/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1700630857&sr=8-1 Here is a two-part series I did on Theology in the Raw on why I believe in the historically Christian view of marriage: Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wuu6LUfEm2A&t=1s Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvuc1S1-408

Hello, friends. So one of my favorite things about Theology in Raw is engaging with my Patreon community. So we're going to do something special with my community that I've actually never done before. My family and I, we are going to record the first ever, what do we call it? Sprinkle family theology in the Raw episode where we will respond to questions sent in by my Patreon supporters. I'm actually kind of nervous about this episode because I've been encouraging my wife and kids to be super honest with whatever question comes in, and I'm honestly a little scared about what they're going to say. So we're going to do it. It's scheduled. We're going to roll the dice with this one, and we're going to release this bonus episode exclusively to the Theology in Raw Patreon community in early December. If you want access

to this crazy episode, then you need to first join the Patreon community at patreon.com forward slash theology in the raw and joining Patreon not only helps support the theology in the raw ministry, but it also gets you access to all kinds of premium content, monthly zoom chats, special written content, monthly bonus Q and A episodes, and much, much more. Again, that's patreon.com forward slash TheologyNRaw. I will see you there. Hey, friends, welcome back to another episode of Theology in the Raw. My guest today is a pastor from Tennessee named Jared. And this is going to be a different sort of TheologyNRaw episode. And I do want to say up front that I sort of broke my rule. My rule is that I just

simply don't engage people on social media in any sort of like debaty way. Like if someone says, you know, you believe two plus two equals five, like I just don't respond. I just, first of all, you know, social media occupies about maybe 0.1% of my mental and spiritual energy. Any more than that, I think, is very unhealthy. And so I've made a rule many years ago just not to engage people on social media. I'm much more interested in long-form conversations and lengthy written responses and things that just aren't in this kind of soundbite-y environment. Anyway, I broke my rule. There was an individual, Jared, who said some things about what I believe and what my ministries represent. And I think, as you'll hear, that he was not representing what I believe accurately. And again, that's just,

I mean, this is just Tuesday for me when somebody would do, um, and again, that's just, I mean, this, this is just Tuesday for me when, you know, somebody would, would do that online. So, uh, again, I typically ignore it, but I broke my rule and I reached out and said, Hey, Jared, would you like to have a conversation about this? I, I, because I don't think he was representing my views correctly. So I, I, the goal is, was not to have a debate. I mean, I know that, um, Jared, I, I, Jared, I'm pretty sure he would say the exact same thing, that we both represent two very different brands of Christianity, if I could put it like that. We have many differences in our beliefs. I'm not here. I'm not really interested in debating those. All I'm interested in is saying, you say I believe this. I actually don't believe that.

Would you please represent my views correctly? So that's what this conversation is. I can't, I'll just spoil it up front. I don't think even in the next hour and a half that we came to an agreement that he was misrepresenting me. I do think Jared is lying about what I believe. And Jared, as you'll hear at the end, thinks I am lying about various things. So that's where we are. I don't know what else to say. I hope you enjoy this interesting and kind of different Theology in Raw conversation. So please welcome to the show, for the first and last time, the one and only Jared Moore.

Jared, how are you doing this morning? I'm doing well, doing well. Just we've had a good day. Folks are gearing up for Thanksgiving and Christmas and I always enjoy this time of year. Will you be taking the week off or is it still a busy week for you? You're a pastor, right? Yeah, I'm a pastor in Crossville, Tennessee. Baptist pastor, Southern Baptist. I'll work until Wednesday and then if folks need visits or something on Friday

or as needed but just not in the office as much. I'm familiar with the big cities there or kind of as needed, but just not in the office as much. So Tennessee, whereabouts? I'm familiar with the big cities there, Nashville, Knoxville. Whereabouts are you in relation to those? It's right in the middle of I-40 between Nashville and Knoxville. And probably what we're most known for now is we have a Buc-ee's. A what? A Buc-ee's.

A Buc-ee's. Do you know what a Buc-ee's is? I'm so sorry. I live north of the Mesa-Dixie line. So you're not a hillbilly, right? Well, I am from Idaho, so that could be another conversation. Sure, sure. Buc-ee's is out of Texas. It's this giant gas station that has, I mean, it's probably got 250 gas pumps and food, and they've got a beaver that is their mascot. And so anyway, the first one in Tennessee was in Crossville. Okay. Okay. I have heard that in your parts of the country, some of the best fried chicken is

actually at gas stations. Is this correct? That's what I've heard too. I have not tried much gas station fried chicken. Yeah, well, that makes two of us. Well, tell us about yourself. So you're a pastor and you, are you married, have kids, I assume? Yeah, I'm married with four children. Yeah, I'm married with four children. I've been a pastor or in pastoral ministry in the SBC for 23 years and went to SBTS for master's and PhD. Okay. Yeah. And your kids, how old are your kids? My oldest is 16 and youngest is nine. Okay. Boys, girls? Three boys and a girl. So we're, we're these, I have four kids,

three girls and a boy. Uh, my, my boy is my youngest and so he's got three older sisters. So we're, we're, we're, uh, yeah, we're, we're in similar state. So we're, my kids are 14 through 20. So just, I guess just ahead of you. What's your, um, if I can ask, what's your favorite thing about being, being a father? father? I always wanted a little brother. I've always loved children, loved babies. I would have 10 kids, but my wife is real tired. We wore out. She does most of the work. She stays home with the kids.

We haven't had any more. But the favorite thing is just getting to love my kids, teaching them God's Word. They have a love for the local church. They have a love for God's Word, a love for truth, a love for worship. a love for truth, a love for worship. You know, we're catechizing with Baptist catechisms like the Second London and the Hercules Collins version of the Heidelberg Catechism. And so they're at church every time the doors are open. That's how they've been since they're little.

And so we enjoy our children. I can't wait to be a grandfather, Lord willing, one day. You know, they're just such a blessing. And I mean, they're sinners. As Votie Bauckham says, what are they, vipers in a diaper or something like that when they're little. But there's just so much good there in the blessing of children. And I want to help and encourage folks to pursue that blessing. Yeah, I would say, yeah, I think being a father is probably my most meaningful and engaging and serious and also fun part of my life. I think through all the different stages.

And I don't think there is any one stage that I love more than any other stage. I mean, every stage has its own challenges. We're in teenage years now, and it's got amazing blessings and unique challenges, you know? But I do miss the stage when they were like two, four, six, eight. They're all two years apart. I do enjoy the stage when they were like two, four, six, eight. They're all two years apart.

I do enjoy my sleep now, which I didn't get a whole lot back then. But yeah, just those fun. I feel like I, and this is probably not good, but I often look at the stage I'm no longer in like, oh, I wish I was back there, rather than savoring the memory of what was and not longing for the past. I don't know if you resonate with that, you know, and there's, I just wish I can kind of like put on ice, you know, each stage so I can go back and

enjoy it. But it's just not, you know, not the way it is. But do you have a favorite hobby that you like to do with or without the family? Man, I just write. I don't really have hobbies. I write and work. Since my wife stays home with the kids, I'll try to write books on the side or I sell Yu-Gi-Oh cards, sell sports memorabilia, things like that on the side. So I don't really have hobbies.

My hobbies need to make some money uh sports are you a football fan i imagine not baseball or yeah i'm not really a baseball fan it was always football and basketball mainly football but football has uh has dampened my spirits a bit why you have a team that's not doing well or what no it's just all the critical theory stuff okay oh yeah yeah i mean to where making the game about something else um okay yeah oh i'm i'm uh i only watched baseball and really only follow well yeah i follow the dodgers primarily um but yeah i don't know if you're yeah we had a really disappointing off season or a post season so i'm still a little bitter about that but the dodgers the dodgers i've got a i want to say i've got an autograph from one of the

old dude from the 1950s um he's not in the hall of fame but he basically won the series for him does that sound right um i probably only know like the duke snyders and sandy kofag they're on the hall of fame though um back in the day if you asked me 25 years ago i'd probably know the entire lineup by heart of every year the dodgers have played but my i don't have time to keep up with the history of stats like i used to i used to mean, goodness, a nut when it came to baseball stats. I can tell you how many RBIs Lou Gehrig had in 1928. I mean, it was, yeah, it was, I just got absorbed with the statistics of it. But that was pre-life ministry, marriage, kids, and all that stuff.

So, well, let's jump in. So I, and I'm a big fan of honesty as I I'm sure you are too. So I'm just going to, you know, be honest. Um, I had not heard of you before last week. Um, I came across this tweet that you posted, which was a summary of, uh, Rosario Butterfield's address. And so I would love to talk about it because to be honest, I don't think it represents what I believe well at all. And I'll just say, I'm perfectly comfortable, as I'm sure you are too, with theological differences. Okay, here's what you believe. Here's what I believe. And maybe there's a place to debate those. I'm not really interested in that here today, unless we can kind of sort through some of the ways I think you have

misrepresented me. So that's kind of where I would like to focus. So let me just read the tweet. You say, listening to Dr. Rosario Butterfield, what Christian ministries are heretical liars. Revoice, Preston Sprinkles, Exiles, and Babylon Conference, sponsored by his heretical Center for Faith, Sexuality, and Gender and Crew. Obviously, I'm not here to... I'm not part of Revoice. I have spoken there, but I'm not going to... I'll let them worry about themselves. Crew, same thing. But man, I got the heresy card twice here. Heretical liars and then a heretical center for faith, sexuality, and gender. And then you...

We can get in because then you summarize what heresies or lies that I have spread. So I'd like to end up working through those. But you... So this is not... I mean, this is your summary of Rosaria, but you believe this. I mean, you tweeted it, you endorsed it. These are very much what you believe too, right? Largely, largely. I'm open to hearing you defend why you believe you've been misrepresented. You may not be aware of this, but I contacted your ministry a couple weeks ago

before all this caruffle and asked to come on your podcast to discuss my book that I've written on this subject, which is basically a lay version of my dissertation that was written against a lot of the theology that you teach. that you teach? Okay. Yeah, I typically don't. When people ask to be on the podcast, that's almost an absolute no when people ask to me. That's a little odd to ask to come on somebody else's podcast. If a publisher contacts me, I get this a lot. Publishers will say, hey, we have this book coming out. I'm the publicist. Would you be willing to have it on? Even then, I typically take about maybe 10% of those that come my way. Like I, typically I like to have time to read the book ahead of time, but when, when you're getting five emails a day like this, I just can't do that. So yeah. And I don't even hand, I didn't even know about the email person. I don't handle all that stuff, but, um, that's what I figured. Yeah. At the beginning

here. Yeah. So yeah. So let's, there is, so even in the statement, you know, Preston Sprinkles Exiles and Babylon Conference is a ministry that is a heretical liar. I just want clarity on this. What do you even mean by the conference? Is it all the speakers at it? We have a diverse range of speakers. Is it me who helps organize it? Is my wife a heretic? She helps organize it. Is it the booksellers, people working in the bookstore, the volunteers, the people who attend? It just to me seems odd to label an entire conference heretical liar. So can you give me more clarity and specificity on what aspect of the conference is a heretical liar. Do you have any speakers who consider themselves trans or

perhaps a different gender or they're in favor of using pronouns to identify their gender? We have a whole range of different speakers. So yeah, if somebody is speaking on sexuality and gender at the conference, which we've done now twice, we do require, like I would never, I don't want to say never, because I'm all for if there's a public debate or something, obviously you would have somebody at the conference that holds to a different view. And we do some of those. We do kind of dialogical debates where we have people with different viewpoints to, um, hash it out. We had different viewpoints on the doctrine of hell one year, um, different viewpoints on the problem of evil. So that would require us obviously to have people at the conference speaking to different viewpoints. That said,

um, for me personally, if somebody is speaking into the conversation around sexuality and gender, I do require, I would only have speakers that affirm a historic Christian view of marriage, namely that marriage is by definition a union, a covenant union, lifelong covenant union between two people of different biological sexes from different families, and that all sexual activity outside of that covenant bond are sin. So that's a brief summary of the historically Christian view of marriage. Now, there's going to be diversity within that. Some people might use pronouns, some people might not use pronouns, some people might use different words to describe their experience. Some people might prefer same

sex attracted, some people might prefer the term gay. And I know we obviously have disagreements here. But yeah, so when it comes to people speaking on questions on sexuality and gender, I only have people that represent the historic Christian view. using someone's pronouns that do not match their biological sex, but match their gender identity. And other people that say, no, I won't use pronouns. I would be perfectly comfortable all things considered if somebody holds to differences on those issues. So if I'm hearing you say, well, the fact that... So say I have 18 speakers one year, if one of them or two of them holds to those pronouns, you would say that you would be comfortable saying the conference as a whole is a heretical liar. Is that right? Are you presenting these people as legitimate, faithful? Let me, before you answer that, can you answer my question though? Can you answer my question, though? If one or two or three people maybe, again, holds a historic Christian view of marriage, but might use someone's preferred pronouns, then you would be comfortable saying, my exiles in Babylon conference that I helped put on, I shouldn't call it mine, I mean, I helped put it on, is just categorically heretical? I would say categorically heretical if you're allowing heretical speakers to speak. It doesn't matter how many. If there's just one, I mean, imagine if this was another sin.

Like, imagine if someone, you know, they're having a conference and, you know, 90% of their people are biblically, foundationally orthodox, but then they've got one that's a white supremacist that speaks. And I know this is apples and oranges, but you've got to understand, when you talk about the biblical sexual ethic, you really think that there are people in church history who would go along with this identifying as a different gender or pronoun, hospitality, or all this nonsense that is just worldly. It's just worldliness.

And so you are legitimizing. When you present, you allow a speaker to come speak who's involved in that. You're legitimizing it, right? I mean, are you not? It's not a debate. I'm just trying to get, I just want clarity on what you mean by that conferences is heretical. So, I mean, I don't want to get lost in the weeds at this point yet that, you know, if somebody uses the term, you know, transgender to describe their gender dysphoria, you would say that's heretical, that's unorthodox, all that stuff. I'm perfectly fine with you having those thoughts. So would you, so if somebody is just to get, and this is a, I'm genuinely trying, I'm not trying to corner you. Like if somebody is attending the conference, you're not saying they are a heretic or like

my wife or some of my kids help, you know, with social media? Like, are they heretics? Or where do you draw the line between who is a heretic in their association with the exiles in Babylon? Like Matt Chandler spoke at it, Francis Chan, we've had, I mean, Jackie Hill Perry, like if any other speaker comes, are they a heretic? Or would you just simply say, I believe that the conference as a whole is a heretical conference, but Matt Chandler isn't necessarily a heretic. I just want to shield my speakers, too, because if they're not hearing the, like, oh, I'm speaking at this heretical conference, what's the deal with that? I'm like, well, I'll try to get clarity on that. I mean, I don't do guilt by association. I think it's unwise for a speaker to speak on the same stage with folks that have pronouns in their bio.

Okay. And you, again, you have a problem biblically, and I think church history has a big problem with legitimizing those who would self-identify and participate in worldliness. It's just rank worldliness, in my opinion. I mean, biblically, I think I can prove that from church history. You speak of the biblical sexual ethic, but what about the biblical understanding of what sex is? Oh, yeah, we'll definitely get to there. Church history.

There's no way that these pronouns in bio and legitimizing that, and some of these folks even identify, you know, contrary to their gender. Yeah, we'll get to that because there's so many questions I have about what you even mean by that. The one, just so you, just in case you care, my audience, my, let's see. I have never had at a conference somebody who is biologically one sex and identifies as the opposite sex. I've never had that. I've never had somebody who has transitioned and is not embracing their biological sex as a fundamental part of the human identity. But again, this is going to take us far afield into the various ways in which the term transgender is used, the various implications of using someone's pronouns, or even giving space to have different viewpoints on that.

But again, right now, before we even get into all that, I just want to get... Again, I have no problem saying... You can still say, yeah, I hear you. I still think you're a heretic. I'm totally fine with that. I just want to make sure that my viewpoints are represented correctly. So let's get into some of the, um, the specific heresies and lives that, uh, we have spread. Um, the first one is the one that I think, I don't, I think I'm, I think I feel fairly well represented here. You say same sex attraction is a sinless temptation and only a sin if you act on it. I might tweak the wording here. I think sinless temptation is a little odd.

I think a temptation is not, I think it is by definition sinless unless you give in to the temptation. Jesus was tempted. And again, we maybe can have that conversation, but I, which you, which I think you're trying to say here. I'm like, I feel, I feel that's fairly accurate. Um, I, if you want, so here's how I would, if you want to, I'm assuming you want to like represent what I actually believe fairly, right? Like that should go without saying, like you're not trying to like straw man me or put words in my mouth that I don't believe. So here's how I have the most concise way I've worded it. Okay. That all sex outside of a male-female marriage is sin. And since we're talking about same-sex sexuality here, I would say including same-sex sexual behavior, every kind of lust is a

sin, but I would say simply being same-sex attracted while being part of one's fallen nature is not a morally culpable sin that an individual needs to repent from. If that's what you mean by same-sex attraction is a sinless temptation and only a sin if you act on it, then I'm perfectly fine with that. And again, I know we have disagreements here. I know I spent some time scanning your Twitter feed again, I know we have disagreements here. I know I spent some time scanning your Twitter feed, so I know we have differences here. Any questions about that before we go to the second? Because I think the second, third, and fourth ones, and then several other things you've said about me on Twitter is really where I want to focus on.

Yeah. Biblically, what you just said, and according to church history, you would be a heretic, according to both Rome. I mean, even the Council of Trent condemns you as a heretic, what you just said, from the 1540s to the 1563. The Council of Trent, because you're saying that sin is based on the will. You're saying that it's based on mindful willing rather than the fact that it's not based on whether or not it's contrary to God. Same-sex attraction is contrary to God. It's contrary to His design. And instead, you're saying, well, only if you submit to it is it sin. And even though it's coming from your heart, even though it's coming from your heart,

even though it's coming from your flesh, even though it was produced by the fall. I mean, biblically speaking, both Trent and the Protestants argued that anything in us, contrary to God, is morally culpable sin, and it's not determined based on whether or not you chose it. So you don't go to the mirror to determine whether or not you've sinned, you go to the Bible. And the Bible is very clear that we're to love God with all our hearts, souls, and minds. And so how does same-sex attraction, which has turned sexuality upside down, how can that ever love God?

How can it ever love our neighbor? That's, yeah, that's an interesting uh perspective again i would i would maybe if we have uh depending on how the rest of these points go we can come back to that because i mean there's several things there i would love to um perhaps discuss but i um yeah let's let's clear up some of this other stuff first before we get back to that so um okay so point number two you say I believe people who experience same-sex attraction are actually gay Christians called to lifelong celibacy. So first of all, this one's a little bit minor, but I've never used the phrase actually gay Christians. I would want maybe some clarity on what you mean by that. But I have never, ever said, nor do I believe that people who experience same-sex

attraction are called to lifelong celibacy. So that is a, I mean, Jared, that's a lie. So I did not believe that. I've never said that. So I'm asking, you very much are very passionate about repenting from sin, obviously. I guess I'm asking, will you publicly repent from sinning, lying about what I believe? I've never said people experience lifelong or same-sex attraction are called to lifelong celibacy. I will read your writings, all of them, and see if you've ever said anything and listen. And if you haven't, yeah, I'll publicly repent. Okay. I'm right here.

I can tell you what I believe. So maybe it'd be more like an unclarity in my... It could be deceitful writing because I'm right here. I'm telling you I don't believe that. Even in my book, from all my... I talk about people who are same-sex attracted, married to people of opposite sex. I've got loads of friends in those relationships.

I've always said that there's one sexual ethic for all people, all people who say they're Christians, celibacy and singleness, sexual faithfulness to one's opposite sex marriage, opposite sex spouse and marriage. That's one sexual ethic for anybody who claims to be a Christian. So if you're single, then don't have sex. If you're married, then be faithful to your spouse in an opposite-sex marriage. So yeah, feel free to go read. And if I've ever said that if you experience same-sex attraction, you factually are therefore called to lifelong celibacy, yeah, I would love to see you find any statement where I said that. Because I've never believed that. I don't believe it.

I've never believed that. I don't believe it. Does your ministry advocate for that anywhere? Your Center for Faith for Sexuality? Do you agree with everything that's on your website for your ministry? Of course, yeah. I wrote it, yeah. You didn't write everything on your – I mean, you've got stuff from Gregory Coles on there.

Oh, I thought you meant my statement. Because we have a doctrinal statement, a statement of sexuality on the front page or whatever. I didn't, I mean, I wrote it and then had other people, you know, cross check it. But yeah, we have a range of other people that write stuff. Nobody has ever said that if you're same-sex attraction, then you are therefore called to lifelong celibacy. So one of the documents on there from Gregory Coles advocates for queer platonic partnership, non-sexual romance, cuddling and kissing among same-sex Christians. So, forgive me for, like, you want me to apologize for... Can I real quick, Jared? That is a different, I actually have that written down. We can come back to that because that's another issue I have, but that's not directly

related to this lie that you said that I believe that if you're same-sex attracted, you are therefore called to lifelong celibacy. That is a lie that is an abomination according to Proverbs 6. So I'm literally telling you, I don't believe that. Never have believed that. You're telling me that, but when I look at your website and I look at some of these articles that are on there, they seem to indicate the opposite. You've got 45 pages from Gregory Coles, and there's nothing about opposite-sex marriage in that entire article. Nothing. That article wasn't about opposite-sex marriage.

I mean, you can't... That's just not a good read. But you just said that that's the goal. You just said that if you're single, be chaste, and if you're pursuing marriage, then you say you're pro-marriage. But here, you've got a whole... I didn't say that phrase, pro-marriage. I want to know what you mean by that. Again, I'll say what I believe one more time. If you're single, be celibate. If you are called to marriage, then you're called to marriage and be faithful to your spouse. Whether you're same-sex attracted, opposite-sex attracted, not attracted to anybody, to me, then you're called to marriage and be faithful to your spouse. Whether you're same sex attracted, opposite sex attracted, not attracted, anybody is, to me, is irrelevant.

There's one objective sexual ethic for people regardless of their orientation or sexual attraction. You can tell me that you don't believe this stuff, but then whenever I go to your website and I see entire articles that are arguing for same-sex celibacy, like there's nothing about opposite-sex marriage. You do have articles emphasizing marriage, don't misunderstand me. But saying that I'm lying whenever your own ministry has things like you... My own ministry has... Nobody in my ministry has ever said, if you experience same-sex attraction, you are therefore called to lifelong celibacy.

It's that narrow phrase. You're going out and finding this article about this and this article about that and this one doesn't mention marriage or whatever. That's just a bad hermeneutic. I need to call Southern and ask who is your hermeneutics professor. I shouldn't have said that.

A bad hermeneutic. It is. Look, brother, you shouldn't have said that. A bad hermeneutic. It is. You don't have any legs to stand on concerning hermeneutics. I shouldn't have said that. That was a pot shot. I apologize, Jared. That was a dumb statement. But again, I'll come back. So I'll say it one more time. You say, I believe people who experience same-sex attraction are called a lifelong celibacy. I've never said that. I don't believe that. Um, if you could turn up a statement where I have said that, then I will publicly repent from that because I don't believe that. I don't think that's biblical. It's not something I've ever believed. Celibacy and singleness,

faithfulness and marriage. That's the broad framework. Do you believe that those are equal, um, equal callings as far as, or would you say that marriage is the default calling according to God's biological design of male and female and singleness is the exception? We can come back to that. I mean, that's an interesting conversation, but I honestly want to get clarity on you saying basically lying about what I believe. So how do we move on from here? basically lying about what I believe. So how do we move on from here? So you're not ready to say, I apologize for lying about what you believe, because even though I'm telling you what I believe, you're not sure you believe me now? I am telling you that there are articles on your website that indicate other than what you're telling me. And so if it's your ministry that is putting things out, maybe you didn't

write it, but it is your approval. It is under your ministry. And so you're saying you want me to repent, but it could be that you need to be more clear and get a better handle on your ministry. Okay, that's fair. Yeah. I don't think we're stuck here. Let me just say for my audience, I would highly encourage anybody listening to go, if you're interested, go on my website, read anything I've written, and see if you can find, again, the specific statement or argument that I think or anybody in my ministry thinks that if somebody experiences, again, let's get the specific phrase, not you wrote an article, it doesn't mention marriage or whatever, but like if you experience same sex attraction, you are therefore called to lifelong

celibacy. So I would, I'm very comfortable having my audience go check out a website, scour my books, I got a lot of footnotes. Maybe it's, you know, go in the footnotes, look it up and down. I'm very comfortable having my audience go check out a website, scour my books. I got a lot of footnotes. Maybe it's, you know, go in the footnotes, look it up and down. I'm saying I've never believed that. So either I'm, yeah, maybe I've been unclear and I've said that. And maybe it was unclear. That's possible.

I'm pretty confident. I mean, my editors would have caught something so sloppy because this is just a theologically disastrous claim. So let's move on, Jared, if you don't. Is that cool? Can we move on? I don't think we're getting anywhere here. So if you don't find this phrase, then you will publicly repent from lying about what I believe? I have no problem publicly repenting if I have lied, but that's going to be a big ask considering all the nonsense that has been put out by your ministry, Preston. I mean, it's going to have to be like, you're saying that exact phrase. Well, did you imply it? What have you actually said surrounding these issues? What have people at your conferences that you have approved said? What is your ministry been pushing and emphasizing? It's not just what Preston

Sprinkle has said from his own mouth. It's what your ministry has put out. And so, look, I have no problem publicly repenting of public sin. Okay, fair enough. Let's move on. Number three, you say people who experience same-sex attraction rarely... Sorry, this is your... Well, I guess it's your summary of Rosaria's summary of what I believe. People who experience same-sex attraction rarely if ever change and therefore should never pursue heterosexual marriage. I have never, ever said that, nor do I believe that people who are same-sex attracted should never pursue heterosexual marriage. This is, I guess, is the other side of the coin from the last one.

So this, we could be, I don't want to just, I don't know, we could, we could repeat what we already said, but I guess I'm asking you, will you repent from the sin of lying about me saying this? Because I've never said that, nor have I ever believed that, that if you're simply same-sex attracted, you should never pursue heterosexual marriage. It's the same answer as the answer on the last question. There's things in my ministry and writings that have either argued this explicitly, or I have said things that have implied that if you're same-sex attracted, you should never pursue a heterosexual marriage. You're saying that there's things that I have advocated for that imply that? Yes, or you have propped people up or invited them to come and approved of them speaking at your conferences or writing articles for your ministry that advocate for things like this. Can you name any... And I don't like when people say, name me a source as if I come with all these sources or whatever. But I am curious,

is there... I have at least one speaker at Exiles this year who is same-sex attracted, who is married to a man. They have three wonderful kids together, an amazing, amazing marriage. In fact, she wrote a book called The Impossible Marriage, arguing that if you're same-sex attracted, that doesn't disqualify you from being in a marriage. She's a good friend of mine. She's on their board. So I literally have a same-sex attracted person who is married to a man, has three kids together, and she's on the board of the center. So you're still saying that me or my ministry is arguing that if you're same sex attracted, you should never pursue a heterosexual marriage. That's odd, isn't it? She's on my board. marriage that's odd isn't it she's on my board what's odd so do you want me to point to gregory cole's article again like we'll get to that because that article wasn't even about yeah we'll

get to that yeah and not not just him but you've had other speakers did you um approve of greg johnson's book still Still Time to Care? Yeah, that's a great book. Love that book. I didn't endorse it, but I read it. And Greg's a friend of mine, so yeah. So you're in favor of what he argues in that book concerning, you know, basically

that this isn't going to change, that... Okay, so there's two different parts to this statement. And I might actually, depending on... So let's make sure we put a bow on this one. So I do not believe, nor have I ever believed, nor have I ever said that people who experience same-sex attraction should never pursue a heterosexual marriage. That is a deceitful and lying summary of what I believe. So I don't believe that.

So, and you're saying you're, you would need to do, or you don't agree. You think I actually do believe that? I think that your ministry, your ministry, either you or your ministry have argued that or have implied that or advocated for that. Yes. Okay. Yes, I do. Again, I am more than comfortable for my audience to go and see if any of my writings or my ministry

who has a board member who is same-sex attracted and in a heterosexual marriage, if we have ever argued that if you're same-sex attracted, you should never pursue a heterosexual marriage. I have platformed many people at my conferences. I mean, these are more offline of testimonies. Just last month in San Diego, wonderful testimony, Jared. You would have loved it. A guy who experienced the same-sex attraction, married to a woman, they got together at, I think, they were like 13 years old. They've been together since they were 13. One of the most delightful couples I've ever met. He didn't even really start experiencing or realize he wrestled with the temptation of same-sex attraction until later on.

They've been married for several years, have three wonderful, I think, three wonderful children together. And we had an amazing testimony where they shared about their marriage how they got together and and um and that that happens frequently i'm the conferences that i that i do so um but i don't i'm hearing you i mean i don't no matter what i say you're not going to believe it you're saying that i'm saying i need to look at your other things that you've argued. Make sure, Jared, it's not... Go ahead. Sorry, I got you off. Or that your ministry has argued. I don't misrepresent people. You don't? No, I don't. You think I'm intentionally headhunting Preston Sprinkle?

Why would I do that? I don't know or care about your intentions. I'm just going off the statement that I came across. Why would I do that? I don't know or care about your intentions. I'm just going off this statement that I came across. Why would I do that? So my goal is to present biblical truth. You appeal to someone on your board. You act like you don't have any same-sex celibate people on your board. Or do you have any same-sex celibate people who speak at your conferences? I am perfectly fine with somebody. So I am perfectly fine with somebody being celibate and not getting married.

Yes. I mean, Greg Coles works for us. We have several people in that category. I'm also equally perfectly fine with somebody same-sex attracted pursuing an opposite-sex marriage. But neither of these statements say that. You were saying if you experience same-sex attraction, your second point, they must therefore call it a lifelong celibacy. And therefore, you should never pursue a heterosexual marriage. Those are two different things. And that's odd if you're saying because I have somebody who is celibate and pursuing singleness and being faithful in that, that therefore I think all should never, that all people in that category should never get married? I mean, that's an odd deduction, don't you think? What I'm saying is that you're trying to say, well, you've got someone who has, who struggles with same-sex attraction that is married, that that somehow absolves you or somehow proves that you didn't say this or that your ministry has never said it.

And I'm saying, no, you actually do have other folks. I mean, so if someone who is battling same-sex attraction is married, you're saying that proves that you don't teach this or that your ministry doesn't teach it whenever you do have folks who are on the other side that are also associated with your ministry. But we can move on. It's the same answer for all these. If you say this does not describe you, then I will go back and look at your ministry

and look at your conferences, look at your speakers, look at what you have sanctioned and approved of publicly. And if I need to repent publicly, I have no problem repenting. Maybe this will help. I'm going to go down. So, because I know that there's not a single person we have enlisted that actually believes this. Now, when you start to say, well, you said something that implies it. Now we're in a weird subjective land that, I mean, what you say is implied.

Somebody else is not going to say implied. But again, I'm perfectly comfortable with my audience going and seeing if we have said or done anything that would imply that. But let me just go down the list of contributors here on our leadership. And our leadership team, just so everybody knows, is really broad. There's leadership team. It's anybody who's kind of done something at some point to contribute to our resources. We put them on the leadership team.

This is not like an active leadership team in fact maybe even leadership team could be not the best freight well oh we use collaborative team i guess that would be better so uh so let me just go down so greg coles he doesn't believe any of these things that you've said uh lou phillips no laurie krieg is in a mixed story a marriage she's married to an opposite sex spouse ro Roger Valtteri, nope. Doesn't believe that. Dave Beeland, nope. Nate Collins, nope. Brad Harper, no, not at all. Josh Butler, nope. Julia Sadowski,

nope. Marhout Yarhouse, nope. Brandon Branson-Parler, nope. Peter Valk, nope. Rachel Gilson is in an opposite sex marriage. Paul Eddy, absolutely not. None of our board members who I've already mentioned do. So nobody, now you don't believe me.

So you say, well, they could have said something somewhere else that implied that. And then it's like, well, I just throw my arms. I'm like, well, okay, I mean, I can't control that. I can say that none of these people believe either of these two statements. But I don't want to, but I just keep going around and around. So do you want to go to the next one or do you have anything else to add to that? Sure. We can go to the, we can go to the next one. Okay. Um, number four, sex and gender are different and God doesn't care if men live as men

or if women live as women, uh, because all you need to do is grow in the fruit of the Spirit as if the fruit of the Spirit, Holy Spirit, can grow from sin. So I have never said, nor do I believe that God doesn't care if men live as men or if women live as women. I would want maybe a little clarity on what you mean by... And here it might be tough because I think you're quoting... I didn't hear Rosaria ever use these exact words. So I think this is your... But if she did... So anyway, you endorsed this phrase. So what do you mean by God doesn't care if men live as men or women live as women? Maybe unpack that for me, and then I'll let you know if I believe that or not. This is a direct quote from Rosaria. Okay. So just like the pronouns in the bio, I mean, is one example. I mean, that implies that sex and gender are different. Does it not? I don't use pronouns in my bio. I would never do that. So

I don't know what you're talking about. So none of your speakers do at your Babylon conference? So Jared, trying to unpack exiles in Babylon for you is not going to make any sense because we have a diverse range of speakers. We do not have speakers that I agree with. I have speakers that come that I even invite people that weren't even Christians. Why? Because I want to hear from the story of why somebody was a Christian and is no longer a Christian. And I want to hear from the actual person. So the whole nature of the conference, you're not going to even be able to understand kind of what we're doing there.

It's just going to be categorically different. That would take us too far afield. So to say that, no, I don't police people whether they put pronouns or not to come and speak at the conference. And I know that probably doesn't make any sense to you, but I'm fine with that difference. I'm perfectly fine with you saying, I think they're therefore your heretic. I'm like, great, cool. Let's move on. I'm just more interested in you accurately representing what I personally actually believe. So I have never said, nor do I believe, that God doesn't

care if men live as men or women live as women. Brother, by you endorsing folks that come and speak at your conference who teach things like this, I mean, Rosaria quoted... Who teaches that? Your conference. Who? Some of the speakers use pronouns in their bio. That's a different question. No, it's not. It is.

Sex and gender are separate. That's literally sex and gender. If you use pronouns in your bio, you're saying that sex and gender are separate. Or different. Not necessarily. Not necessarily. Well, then why do you have pronouns in your bio you're trying to identify i don't have pronouns in my bio let's get back to your

people who do you endorse people who do and that's the issue preston like you you're saying you keep pointing to yourself i never said this but you publicly approve of those who say it. First of all, I don't publicly approve of that. That is a speaker's whatever they want to do. We don't police those things. If someone wants to use pronouns in their bio, then they can do it. If not, they don't need to do it. Whatever. There's no requirement for or against. To us, it's not. We don't police speakers and whether they want to do that. I'm more interested in God doesn't care that my ministry endorses or that I endorse that God doesn't care if men live as men or women live as women. I mean, I wrote literally a whole book on this topic. Have you read my book and body, Jared, or no?

Yeah, I would encourage you to go read it because I argue extensively in the entire book that biological sex determines whether we are male or female, that as Christians, we should embrace that reality. And if we raise a question, Jared, the leading question I raise in that book is if someone experiences incongruence between their biological sex and their internal sense of self, which one determines who they are? How would you answer that? I'm curious how you'd answer that question. If someone experiences some kind of incongruence, they experience a disconnect between their biological sex and their internal sense of self, which one determines who they are?

First off, let me just point out something, Preston. You don't want to answer that question? I mean, it's a real easy one, man. I've told you it's awful. No, I'm happy to answer the question, but you're moving on from something I want to discuss first. Well, this is, again, this has to do with God doesn't care if men live as men or women live as women. I want to say focus on that specific phrase because this is one of the four statements that were said about me that is just fundamentally not true. I don't believe that. I don't say that. I have not argued. I've argued in a sense the opposite in my book. Again, maybe as a sub, I do want to get

clarity on what you mean by men living as men. If you mean men, you know, can't wear pink and can't grow their hair long and must like sports or some of these gender stereotypes, because some people mean that, Jared, that that's, or if a woman doesn't like to wear a pink dress and likes to watch action movies and smoke cigars, then she's like disobeying God because she's acting like a man. There could be some specifics of what you mean by living as a man, living as a woman, that maybe there we would have some disagreement that I'm happy to say, yeah, I don't believe what you believe with that. But I believe that biological sex is a fundamental part of human identity. Genesis 1.27 makes that really clear. A Judeo-Christian view of the human body never separates the human body from one's personal identity. So that's what I actually believe. I mean, I spent a whole book writing

about this, argued extensively from scripture going through Genesis 1 and 2, 1 Corinthians 6, Romans. We looked at 1 Corinthians 11, looked at Deuteronomy 22, Romans 1, and other passages. So I don't think this is… Before I answer that question, I'm still on sex and gender are different. Before I answer that question, I'm still on sex and gender are different. All right. You say we don't police whether or not folks use pronouns in their bio before they come speak at the conference. But if someone had like a Confederate flag in their bio or if someone was a white supremacist or said something publicly like that, y'all would police that. There are things you would police.

like that, y'all would police that. There are things you would police. There are certain things that people embrace and believe that we would not platform. Yeah, I would not have you come speak in my conference chair. But I would consider whether someone uses pronouns. Which is nuts that you wouldn't have me come speak at your conference. I'm just arguing what literally every Christian believed for 1700 years. I mean, it's amazing to me that, yeah, that's just, that's an admission. So I will, again, I am perfectly comfortable with whatever disagreements we have, Jared. I am only interested in accurately representing us. So yes, I'll say this. If somebody puts pronouns in their bio, or if somebody says, I will use somebody's pronouns as a matter of accommodation, perhaps hospitality, that do not match somebody else's biological sex, I know you think that's heresy.

do not match somebody else's biological sex. I know you think that's heresy. I don't believe it is. So that's a difference we have. That doesn't mean that I believe God doesn't care if men live as men or women live as women. But I think you probably say it does, right? Like, again, I want clarity. You would probably say, if I allow a speaker at a conference with a diverse range of speakers that has pronouns in their bio, I want to summarize your view correctly. I don't want to strawman you. You would say, if I allow a speaker at this conference who does have pronouns, then I therefore think that God doesn't care if men live as men or women live as women? Is that an accurate representation of what you would believe? I'm saying that you're sanctioning that sex and gender are different.

And concerning God doesn't care if men live as men or if women live as women, I would say that that refers to your sanctioning of same-sex attraction, because the most unmasculine thing that a man can do is be attracted to another man. And the most unfeminine thing a woman man can do is be attracted to another man. And the most unfeminine thing a woman can do is to be attracted to another woman. Because entailed in biblical masculinity and biblical femininity, according to Genesis 2, is God literally took a piece of the man and made the woman. And then he's missing something from his body.

And then she's missing something from his body, and then she's missing something. And so God brings the two back together to become one flesh, and that includes what it means to be masculine or feminine. And you're saying that sexuality seems to be separate from biology, it sounds like. Okay, so I do want to come back to sex and gender difference i think that's yeah that's that's important to tease out um so am i hearing you say that if say i believe that um somebody experiences same-sex attraction then they are not living as a then they are a biological let's say for instance for instance, a biological male who, you would say if biological male experiences same-sex attraction, then therefore they are not living as a man?

Would you, because if that's what you mean by this, then I guess I might, I wouldn't word it this way. I mean, this is super misleading and unclear, but if that's what you mean by that, then I guess I can say, sure, I guess I would agree that we disagree on that. I'm saying it's not sin, number one. Okay, number one. And then number two, I'm saying that you believe you can sublimate that, that you can sublimate homosexual orientation. Is that correct? You can turn it to something holy? I don't even, I mean, I would need to unpack that. That's a whole, that's taken us to a different direction.

I guess I just want to get clarity on this one statement because I think you're misrepresenting me. So I want to make sure that you either are or aren't. But I want to understand what you're saying here. That God, again, specifically, that God doesn't care if men live as men or women live as women. Because there's people saying like, Preston, do you believe that?

I'm like, no, I don't believe that. Like, where'd you get that? I'm like, well, so-and-so said it or whatever. I'm like, well, I've never said that. I don't believe that. So that's what I'm trying to get clarity here. It sounds like, again, you're once again lying about what I believe when I don't believe that. But again, when you say men, can you define when you say men living as men?

Men living as men would be not being sexually attracted to other men. Something that you say is not, something you say is not sin. All right. And something I believe you say can be turned to holiness, or it can be turned in a way that does honor God. You say that homosexuality or homosexual orientation cannot be reduced to the sex act, that there are non-sexual, non-genital things that are entailed in homosexual orientation that can be sanctified. Is that what you believe?

Can I come back to that? Because I do want to put a bow on this because I'm more than happy to unpack what I believe about what you're getting there. You don't think that's it? Here's my recommendation. If my recommendation, Jared, please hear me. I know some of these things can get caught to where you're trying to corner somebody or whatever. This is a genuine recommendation. I don't think, I think we have very different views on what men living as men is. So I don't think this is a helpful phrase for you to use to describe me because what you mean by this phrase is quite different than what most people are going to hear.

Like this doesn't, if you want to say Preston believes that somebody can be same-sex attracted and still be a godly man as a man and remain single, how dare he? He's a heretic. If you want to say that, I'm totally fine with that. Cause yeah, I do believe, I actually believe that. I believe somebody can be same-sex attracted and be a godly man, depending on what they do with that attraction. So I totally believe that. I'm perfectly fine with you saying I believe that. But when you say I believe God doesn't care if men live as men or women live as men, that's just a very, at the very least, it's somewhere ranging between a full-on lie to a very misleading statement of what I believe. What if I say that Preston believes that a man who's having same-sex desires, that he can act on those and glorify God if they are non-sexual, non-genital?

What if I say that? I don't even know what you mean. I would, here's, let me, let me summarize. I mean, you could say Preston believes that simply being same-sex attracted is not a morally culpable sin. Same-sex lust is a sin. Same-sex sexual behavior is a sin. But if you simply experience same-sex attraction, that is not what I would consider a morally culpable sin that somebody needs to repent from. Can I give you an illustration? And so if you say that, that's actually what I believe and what I think I've said and written everywhere else.

Like there's a chance I might have said something off the cuff that wasn't that exact wording, but that is what I believe. Now, yeah, sorry, go ahead. That's heresy according to church history, what you just said. Okay, that's fine that you believe that. As long as you say that phrase. It's a fact, brother. I mean, you need to go read what church history, like, I know you're well read. I'm not making a negative statement about your reading or anything. But on this subject, you're terribly mistaken from church history. Even if your distinction between lust and this pre-lust desire, that is absent from church history. Okay, that's fine.

It's just absent. Eastern or Western, I'm curious. Eastern or western church history you're an interview you're you're an innovator is i mean is what you are you're you're you have the modern roman catholic position which basically from the 1700s forward especially expressed in the most recent catechism of the roman catholic church but but the council of trent would call the modern church roman cath Catholic Church heretics for their understanding of sin. And so, anyway, I want to contact you.

That's fine. I'm totally fine with you saying Preston, according to church history, is a heretic, as long as you summarize what I actually am saying and believing. That's honestly my only concern. my only concern. This episode is sponsored by Haya Health, a children's nutritional supplement that's actually really good for them. So I first heard about Haya through an advertisement on another podcast, and I immediately thought, man, I wish this was around when my kids were young. It can be so difficult. As you know, if you're a parent, you know, it can be hard to get your children to consume all the nutrition that they need. And this

is where Haya can help. Because let's be honest, most children's vitamins are basically like candy in disguise. They're filled with sugar, unhealthy chemicals, other gummy junk that kids shouldn't eat. That's why Haya was created. It's a pediatrician approved, super powered, chewable vitamin. And while most children's vitamins are filled with sugar, Haya is made with zero sugar and zero gummy junk. And it actually tastes good. Like I tried it myself and I was shocked at how good it tastes for being so packed with so many vitamins and nutrients. Haya is pressed with a blend of 12 organic fruits and veggies, then supercharged with 15 essential vitamins and minerals, including vitamin D, B12, C, zinc, folate, and many others to help support immunity, energy, brain function, mood, concentration,

teeth, bones, and more. It's non-GMO, vegan, dairy-free, allergy-free, gelatin-free, nut-free, and everything else that you can imagine. So we at Theology Nira, we worked out a special deal with Haya for their bestselling children's vitamin. You can receive 50% off your first order. That's a lot. Um, to claim this deal, you must go to hayahealth.com forward slash T-I-T-R. This deal is not available on the regular website.

So you actually have to go to the, this website. So, uh, H-I-Y-A health.com forward slash TITR. Uh, it's all in the show notes and get your kids the full body nourishment that they need to grow into healthy adults. So I don't, again, I don't kick a dead horse here. Cause there are a few other things to get to. Um, I don't know. I'm kind of at a stalemate here on God doesn't care if men live as men. Let me just say it one more time, I guess. I think that's, I don't believe that. I think we're going to have different definitions of what we each mean by men living as men and women as women.

Well, I think encouraging someone to act on the non-sexual or aspects of their same-sex attraction is you're essentially telling men that part of the way that Adam looked at Eve, they're looking at another man that way, non-sexually, because it comes from homosexual orientation. And you're telling them that it's okay to act on those desires that are not inherently sexual, but they're still from homosexual orientation. And that is encouraging a man to essentially act on a desire that Eve would have had, not Adam. that Eve would have had, not Adam. Okay. And that is the opposite of living according to one's design, either male or female. It is effeminate to tell someone who is having same-sex desires that there are elements of that same-sex attraction that can be sanctified, telling a man that.

So that's... You're telling him he doesn't have to live according to masculinity. How would you define masculinity? That might be sanctified, telling a man that. So that's... You're telling him he doesn't have to live according to masculinity. What do you mean by... How would you define masculinity? That might be helpful. Well, it's definitely not acting on homosexual orientation, number one. Sorry, what do you mean by acting on? Like having sex with another dude?

No, I mean, I'm talking about the same-sex friendships that your ministry advocates for. Okay, so we'll... friendships that your ministry advocates for, that celibate partnerships, that that is pure effeminacy, that you're sanctifying. You're literally turning biological God's design upside down, just in a less heinous way than men having sex with men. But it is still encouraging what you say you don't believe. So you would say, and we'll get the celibate partnerships because if somebody isn't familiar with that, we need to unpack what that means and what we have actually said about that. So you would put that in the category though. If two people are attracted to the same sex,

they're committed to celibacy, and they are committed to a non-sexual lifelong friendship, that that is an example of a man not living as a man. Would you say that that's true? It is because you're arguing that it comes from same-sex attraction. Y'all aren't arguing for same-sex attracted men to go find opposite-sex women to befriend and covenant with or anything like that. It's literally, you desire same-sex intimacy because of your homosexual orientation, and you need to go fulfill that. That can be sanctified, is what I'm understanding your ministry argues for. So, okay, so this is actually helpful. So if I believe that if you're a man and you're not actively pursuing a heterosexual marriage, then you are not living as a man.

Would that be true? Is that what you think? That is not what I said. Okay. What I said was your ministry is advocating for gay Christians or same-sex attracted Christians to reject the same-sex sexual attraction, but to sanctify the same-sex attraction by forming these covenant friendships with the same sex, even covenant households. Okay, so it's the covenant friendships between two people who are attracted to the same sex that you would say that is by definition not living as a man. Is that true? Absolutely, because y'all include same-sex attraction in there. Okay. It's not two dudes getting together, and that's not what it is. Y'all are arguing that these guys have non-genital desires for same-sex intimacy that can be fulfilled in same-sex friendships.

So it's not the same as me having a friend that I'm super close with. That's not what you're advocating because it is particularly gay or homosexual. Y'all include that in it. And I even read in your ETS paper that you did in 2014, you referenced David and Jonathan and Jesus and John as examples of this, and that couldn't be further from the truth. So, okay, again, just to get clarity, so I think the problem here, Jared, is that we have different definitions of men, what it means for a man to live as a man, a woman to live as a woman. I'm perfectly comfortable with those differences that we have.

I still do think that when you say, I believe God doesn't care if men live as men or women live as women, that I'm perfectly fine, for instance, with a biological female transitioning and identifying as a male and vice versa. When I hear this phrase, that's where my mind goes. But you haven't even really mentioned that. You keep talking about sexual attraction and, partnerships or friendships or whatever. Um, I feel like this phrase doesn't capture it. It, it misleads people regarding what I actually believe. Cause I think when they hear, when I hear, I think a lot of people would probably hear what I hear when I hear this men, men, God doesn't care if men live as men, women live as women. I don't think people are going to say, well, so you think that people can be same-sex attracted and be celibate and single and have a

lifelong friendship with somebody else who is celibate and single or whatever. I don't think most people are going to go there when they hear that phrase. So I do think it's misleading. If you want to say, I think Preston's a heretic for not condemning so-called celibate partnerships, which we still need to get to, Jared, I understand that. I'm perfectly fine with that. I just think this phrase isn't the best summary of what I actually believe. Do you usually make a practice of – I quoted Rosaria. This is my understanding. What I just shared with you is my understanding of what she said.

Okay. So, I mean, you can say that people hear something differently. That's not what I heard. understanding what i just shared with you is my understanding of what she said okay so i mean you can say that people hear something differently that's not what i heard i just shared with you what i heard all right so you'd have to ask rosaria exactly on what you're saying what you're hearing because i didn't hear that okay that's fair um with the sex and gender being different um what do you mean by... Because for me, I'm like, it depends on what people mean. That might be an accurate representation of what I believe. It depends on what they mean by... Honestly, every single one of these terms,

sex, gender, and different, we kind of need to explore. The term gender in 2023 is defined by 10 people in 11 different ways. So it's one of the reasons why I don't love the term, quite honestly. I try to avoid it when I can. But it is a term people use, so I do discuss it. I guess, what do you mean? When you say, I think sex and gender are different, what do you mean by gender? Can you define that? You permit folks to speak at your conference who use pronouns in their bio.

Just the fact that someone uses pronouns in their bio means that they distinguish sex from gender. What are your pronouns, Jared? I don't have any pronouns. What do you mean, what are my pronouns? Like you don't refer to yourself as do you mean what are my pronouns like you don't refer to yourself as he or him what kind of question is that what do you what do you do do you want me to use he or him to refer to you what is that's such a ridiculous question i'm asking a question do you do you like why why are you asking that that is such a question

we're talking about pronouns ridiculous question okay here's what i'm getting at jared so so if if a biological male puts he him in his bio are you saying that you have a problem with uh an equal problem with that or are you saying if a biological male has she her in their bio is that what you have a problem with or is it any just list mentioning pronouns mentioning pronouns why in the world so it's not the cross-sex pronouns that you have it's not just that it's it's simply mentioning pronouns it's all because you are separating obviously i'm male right like there's male and female that's what there is and all these other they them you know yeah when you you you have things with your conference that you're going to police you

even said you wouldn't you wouldn't permit me to speak which is that's hilarious to me considering like what evidently i'm i'm so far out there, which I'm emphasizing what church history has emphasized for 1700 years and Protestants have emphasized for 2000. I'm so far out there. I can't speak at your conference, but you're going to people who have pronouns in their bio, you're going to have them speak. You know, I mean, you're willing to police things and I need to be policed. But these other folks don't. That's just remarkable to me, Preston. It's just remarkable.

I don't understand. Yeah. I honestly don't want to get into that. I would encourage somebody to go scan Jared's Twitter feed. Sure. Go scan it. Go scan it. And pay attention to how he interacts with people. And I think it would be self-evident why I wouldn't have you speak in a conference.

We're not talking. We shouldn't. I mean, we're getting off the rails here. What's your definition of gender? When you say sex and gender, I believe sex and gender are different. What does gender mean in that statement? I don't believe sex and gender are different. What is gender? When you say gender, I didn't even know what that word means. Male or female. What? Male or female.

So what's sex? If everything... So what's sex? If every... Listen to me for a second. Wait, wait. I just want definitions so we can move on and discuss this. What's your definition? Are you saying they're synonyms? Sex and gender are referring to the exact same thing. I'm saying that biologically, sex and gender are the same thing. Concerning if everything was healthy in an individual, males produce small gametes, females produce large gametes. That's the way I would define male or female.

And that's sex or is that gender? Is that sex? It's both. The whole point here is that sex and gender are not different. So sex and gender are synonyms, you're saying? I believe they're the same. So I could say if they're the same, then how do I believe they're different? If the term gender means sex and if sex means gender, you could equally say sex and sex or gender and gender. So does it make any sense to you that I believe, say, sex and sex are different?

It makes no sense to me that you would endorse people who put pronouns in their bio because they are publicly saying that their sex is different from their gender. That's what they're saying. What's gender mean? When the word gender comes out of your mouth, you just said that gender means sex. So if someone puts pronouns in their bio and gender means sex, then you're saying that sex and sex are different i don't i i don't know what you mean by gender listen for a second please okay so they're saying sex and gender are different i'm saying they're not so what's okay they're saying okay okay okay i'm saying they're not okay do you understand you understand the difference? Well, I'm not quite sure yet. I'm trying to get there. So you use the term gender as a synonym for sex.

So there is... And you're trying to summarize what somebody else means by gender. Can you... Okay, maybe that's where we need to go. What do you think? Because this is a claim. Can we deal with me first and then talk about other people at the conference? Because you keep bringing it to speakers at my conference.

It's just a whole other conversation about the nature of the conference. Your conference was named by Rosaria is the only reason I'm mentioning it. I didn't say this, but this is what Rosaria says. You asked me why she says things like this. And then I point out this about your conference and you're like, well, we don't police whether or not people use pronouns in their bio, but by someone using a pronoun in their bio, they are separating their biological sex from their gender. They're saying, obviously I'm male or obviously I'm female, but here are my pronouns. Well, why are you

listing your pronouns if sex and gender are the same thing? Not everybody that lists pronouns in their bio would agree with that statement. But again, that's taken us, I mean, people put pronouns in their bio for all kinds of different reasons. So they're not necessarily saying, I believe sex and gender are different. What do you think people mean by gender when they distinguish between sex and gender? Because I'm not 100% sure I would even agree that I think... So here's where I'm coming from. I'm not quite sure if this is an accurate representation of what I believe, because I'm not sure, I guess, what you mean by gender.

If you mean one thing, then I would say, no, I don't think sex and gender are different. If you define it another way, then I might say, yeah, according to that definition, I might say, yeah, I think that those are different. Or I can maybe, do you want me to say what I... I've told you that I believe that gender and sex are the same thing, that they're determined by God.

And you cannot self-identify contrary to your biology, contrary to God's design of you. But that is what the distinction, when you say that sex and gender, or when you say the pronouns are something biblical or something that I can use and be faithful to the Lord, you know, biblical or something that I can use and be faithful to the Lord, you're separating your gender from your biological sex by someone saying my pronouns are... What's gender? Pretend like I don't speak English. So instead of using the term gender, maybe insert a definition for this word that I'm hypothetically unfamiliar with. Because again,

the term gender can be used so differently with different people. I need to know. When you say you separate sex from gender, I need to know what you mean by the term gender, because that's a claim about what I believe. What am I separating? What am I separating? Biology from saying what you are. It's the same thing as someone who is a biological male saying they're a woman. They're separating how God designed them from what they are saying they are. They're saying their gender is different from their biological sex. is different from their biological sex. Someone who uses pronouns in their bio are at least implying the same thing. I still hang about the gender thing,

Jared. So if somebody is separating sex from gender, they're separating sex from fill in the blank. They're separating what they are biologically from what they say they are. what they are biologically from what they say they are. They're identifying contrary to their design. It's based on a choice in the head. Like they're saying something contrary to God's design. So if that's what you mean by people that claim sex and gender are different, then I don't believe that. Because again, I've already argued extensively in my book Embodied

that biological sex determines who you are. If you are biologically male, then you are factually male, regardless of whatever incongruence you experience. I mean, it took me seven, eight chapters and three years of research to argue that. Then why would you have someone speak at your conference who has pronouns in their bio? First of all, you are assuming that if you simply list pronouns in your bio, that you therefore believe sex and gender are different. That is not necessarily the case. And you and I can disagree to disagree on that. You think by definition, if somebody lists pronouns in your bio, then therefore you do think that people who are male can say identify

as female. I'm saying that's just factually not true. I know people that list their pronouns in a bio for all kinds of different reasons. Jared, maybe it would be helpful. I purposely don't list my pronouns in my bio. I think it actually reveals a certain view of a theological anthropology that I don't agree with. But I don't. This is not, to me, a matter of like, or if somebody does list their pronouns in their bio for various reasons, that I would therefore not have them speak at the conference. This is more just the nature of the conference that you're never going to understand, Jared. There's no, I mean, that's just not.

And I'm not, again, I'm not here to convince you like, no, the exiles Babylon conference is something you should agree with. Like, I know that that's not going to happen. Um, I am just more interested specifically in people representing what I actually believe and perhaps by extension, what, um, my ministry believes. Um, yeah, I'll leave it at that. Yeah, the exiles, we're not going to get anywhere on that. For my audience, I mean, if they're not familiar, so exiles is a place where we have curious conversations with thoughtful people. There is no doctrinal statement people need to sign to come.

We have a range of different viewpoints. We often have debates. Like in this year, we have three different perspectives on politics, where we have a left-leaning Christian, a right-leaning Christian, and a more anti-partisan Anabaptist Christian. They're going to present their viewpoints, and then they're going to engage in a lengthy dialogue with each other. And there's going to be differences. So by definition exiles has a range of differences that we represent so um but you wouldn't let me come speak though like that it's just amazing to because evidently my tone online is not to your liking but if i had

pronouns in my bio and i was whatever your arbitrary definition of sweetness online is. I'm just direct, man. I just, I believe, because I believe the Bible is the words of life. I believe when it cuts us, it cuts us to send us running to Jesus. And I have no problem being direct. And I appreciate you having me on to be direct with me, because I think that's biblically lacking. And just honestly, I would love to publicly debate you on this first point concerning same-sex attraction formally.

Yeah, I'm honestly not even interested in that. I don't do debates and especially, I mean, I don't... So Rosaria Butterfield even said, you know, we don't throw people away, but without repentance, we don't trust them. We trust repentant saints. I believe you have lied about several things I've said, and I don't feel confident you're going to repent from the sin of lying, which Proverbs 7 says is one of the several things, six things, yea, verily seven, that God hates. So no, I'm not interested in having that debate. You have not demonstrated that I have lied. All right. So you're saying you have said a lot of things and you have sanctioned a lot of people and affirmed a lot of people and a lot of teachings.

All right. So to say, well, I never said that doesn't mean that you haven't approved of those publicly who have. And so I'm going to go research that. I'll go look at that. But by you just making the accusation that I've lied doesn't demonstrate that I have lied. People who experience same-sex attraction are called to lifelong celibacy. That is a lie. I've never said that and never believed it. People who experience same-sex attraction should never pursue a heterosexual marriage. That is a lie. I've never said that. I don't believe that. Sex and gender. Well, this one, I don't think we're going to get very far on because I still don't really know when you say people distinguish between sex and gender.

Well, I guess I did get a little more clarity on that. So that's helpful. Um, I don't think when you say God doesn't care if that, I believe God doesn't care if people, if men live as men or women live as a man. And I think that is at the very least a gross misrepresentation of what I believe. But you haven't read my book, so I don't, in a sense, I'm like you're... It's not about book. It's about, I believe that sexuality is entailed in biology, and you seem to not believe that. You seem to believe that a homosexual orientation is masculine. And I'm saying it's not. Do you believe a homosexual orientation is masculine? I don't even know what you mean by both those phrases.

What do you mean masculine? What do you mean orientation? We're going to have different categories of these things. And here, I'm just so not interested in debating these categories with you. So let me publicly say, Jared, and I, uh, I'm, I'm not confident this is going to change into your mind, but maybe for my audience. So, um, up until some, you know, several decades ago, people use sex and gender as synonyms like, like, like Jared does that the term gender refers to biological sex. The term sex refers to biological sex up until about 50 years ago, people started to make a distinction between biological sex and what some people might call

the psychological, cultural, and social aspects of being male and female. Maybe we can even say like masculinity and femininity. So some people would use the term gender now to refer to those psychological experiences or social roles that men and women play. Now, I'm not even saying I agree or disagree with those distinctions. I'm just saying these are how the terms are used in common discussions around trans identities. So I first like to understand how people are using their terms so that I know what we're even talking about, which is what I've tried to do with you when you use the term gender. So it depends what people mean by gender, whether I would sign off on, I think sex and gender are different. If what they mean by gender is like masculinity and femininity, and these categories a lot of times are just culturally defined and influenced. If a person is, again, if a female cuts her hair short, loves sports, smokes cigars, loves action movies, hates chick flicks, whatever, some people

will say, wow, she's kind of masculine. I'm going to say whatever term you want to... And if someone says, well, that's her gender, masculine, I'm like, you know what? I don't even think that's helpful. In fact, I don't even think it's... I like to say a female is a female, a male is a male, and they're going to have all kinds of likes and dislikes and interests in the world. And I think a female should identify as female and a male identify as male. Is the term gender helpful to use as a word to describe these largely personality differences? I don't think it's that helpful. Yeah. I don't even, when people say you distinguish between sex and gender, honestly, these are such broad debated categories. It's hard for me to understand. Like, I'm not even sure what people mean by that i don't know is that i probably confused you more than help jared right is that i mean i don't well it's i'm not thinking of any of those things i'm talking about biology i'm talking about

separating again it's back to the pronouns i think it's an implication in the pronouns and by you you know sanctioning folks and approving the folks who use pronouns in their bio to speak at your conference and to write it, or things that you approve of or people that you approve of that have done this, is a statement concerning you as well. You can say you don't, but you at the very least have approved of those who do. It's not a lie. It's not a lie because, again, the original quote with Rosaria was not just Preston Sprinkle. It was Preston Sprinkle's Babylon ministry and your Center for Faith. So she pointed out, I mean, that's a whole bunch of people. That's a whole bunch of people involved in your conferences, a whole bunch of people involved in your ministry. And it includes anything that

you've sanctioned concerning what they've said as well. Jared, I'm sorry, we are getting... I have another meeting here in a second. There's two more things I want to identify that I believe you have lied about. The first one, this is a softball, so this should be an easy, quick repentance on your part. Crew has asked Preston Sprinkle to oversee its sexuality curriculum. That is Rosaria. Huh? That's Rosaria. So you don't necessarily agree with that or you don't... Okay. So you don't... You can neither confirm nor deny that statement. So just from what I've seen from Cruz documents,

you were heavily involved in their curriculum. Are you not? They never asked. I don't oversee any of their sexuality curriculum. No. No, no, no. What I'm asking, were you heavily involved in their curriculum?

Are there videos of you in their curriculum that folks have to watch? I'm going to use the actual wording here. Crew asked Preston Sprinkle to oversee. I'm a big language guy, man. I like to get at what people are actually saying. You are involved. You're involved in crew's curriculum. There's no doubt about that. You know you You are involved in cruise curriculum. There's no doubt about that.

You know you're involved in cruise curriculum. The question you're talking about, oversee. Well, I didn't oversee it. But are you heavily involved in cruise curriculum? What do you mean by heavily involved? I've never written anything. They use our resources. Loads of ministries use our resources.

Liberty University uses our resources. InterVarsity uses our resources. Tons of people use our resources. Loads of ministries use our resources. Liberty University uses our resources. InterVarsity uses our resources. Tons of people use our resources. So if you think that people simply tap into our resources or read my books, is anybody reading my book? Does that mean I'm heavily involved in their whatever, if they use my book or use our resources? If that's your definition of heavily involved, then sure, I'm heavily involved in thousands of people's lives because, and you are too. People read your book. If I read your book, does that mean you're heavily involved in my ministry because I read your book and maybe drawn some helpful things from it? If you put a curriculum and you have your whole board go through it and I'm teaching

on some of those videos that they're watching, then I'm heavily involved in that curriculum. So you could actually be heavily involved in our ministry because we might, if we use your book and draw things that we find are biblical and, you know, eat the meat, spit out the bones and quote from Jared saying, here's some things Jared says, then you are heavily involved in my heretical ministry. That is interesting. It's exactly what you said. I mean, it's just logically, that's the same thing, right? You're saying if people use something I said, then I personally am heavily involved.

That's fine. I'm only – the only problem I have – I have no problem if you're like, yeah, that's what you mean. That's what it means to be heavily involved. I have no problem with that. Let me phrase it this way. Wait, wait, wait. I'm specifically – I am overseeing their sexuality statement. That is factually wrong.

I am not overseeing it. This is a softball, man. It should be easy. You just say, oh, man, okay, well, I heard you were, but I guess you're not because you're factually not. So, yeah, I apologize. I repent from my sin of disrepresenting you. Preston, has Crew paid you any money?

Has Crew paid me any money? First of all, I don't think, I honestly can't even remember if they, like, paid for my resources. First of all, I don't think, I honestly can't even remember if they paid for my resources. Our resources are paid resources. My books are paid books. No, I mean, do you know, has Crew paid for using

your materials or your videos for their curriculum? Our videos are, we have paid resources and free resources. So by definition, if they're going to use a paid resource, they would have to pay for it. Again, there's loads of organizations that pay for our resources.

I'm more interested... Again, I'm not going to show you my checkbook. I'm not going to show you my bank account or whatever. All I want to say is it's factually wrong to say I oversee Cruz's sexuality curriculum. Well, then take that up with Rosaria. I quoted Rosaria.

Take it up with her. Okay. I thought you agreed with this statement. So if I quoted, if you quoted someone who said something, that they had the research, and you quoted it, I'm assuming that she understood that you were over that. If you're asking me if I would quote somebody that I haven't verified, no, I would never quote somebody saying, this is true. And someone's like, have you verified that? Nope. But I still think it's true. No, I wouldn't. I wouldn't do that. Um, okay. Can I point out one, just one more thing, Jerry, gosh, I'm going to have another meeting that's going to pop in here in just one second. Um, you say Preston Sprinkles ministry, ministry, the center for faith, sexuality,

and gender advocates for LGBTQ quote, queer platonic partnerships, non-sexual romance, cuddling and kissing, snuggling in bed. And then you mentioned, for some reason, Rachel Gilson being part of our ministry, not involved in this paper. And then even Rebecca McLaughlin pointed out that this paper is not advocating for. We say that explicitly in the introduction and in the conclusion.

I would encourage people to go. In this paper, this is a quote from the actual introduction of the paper. In this paper, we won't deny the value, or sorry, what about, are any of these behaviors that we're going to describe sinful or maybe unwise but not sinful? Are there any behaviors that might be unwise and sinful for some while morally neutral for others? value of these questions, but we will focus our attention on listening and understanding what people are currently doing so that we have the knowledge we need to approach these questions with care. And then he summarizes basically what are these things that people call, I mean, it goes by many different names, sometimes solid partnerships, sometimes covenanted friendships.

At the very end, the last paragraph, Greg Holes says, I haven't tried in this paper to painstakingly evaluate the relative wisdom and kingdom effectiveness of various forms of celibate partnership and committed friendship. So it is a lie to say my ministry advocates for non-sexual romance, cuddling and kissing, advocates for non-sexual romance, cuddling and kissing, snuggling in bed. That is factually wrong.

No, it is not. No, you are lying. You are lying. I literally read the paper, dude. This is a positive paper. Imagine if I wrote the same paper, but the sin was white supremacy. That we need to... Summarize what white supremacy is

and say, no, that is not what you do. That's exactly what we do by definition. I could read it again. No, I won't read it. I'm out of time. You tell people at the very end, don't lead to conclusions about how a particular celibate partnership or committed friendship works. Second, remember that there are relatively few models of celibate partner. You're telling people to go easy on these people who are involved in this. You're telling them you're giving directions. Third, when it comes to the question of appropriate boundaries on several different registers, including not just the physical and

emotional intimacy, but also language use, finances, openness to adding members, and so on, consider the possibility that wisdom may dictate different answers for different types of people. This is advocating. That's advocating. Summarize what they are. It is advocating. You didn't summarize your given directives at the very end, Preston. This is just empty rhetoric. You are lying. You need to publicly repent on this. That is a lie, a bold-faced lie to say you're not advocating for this. You put that in the most positive light possible. We described, I would encourage my audience

to go check it out. This is free on our website. It's called Understanding Celibate Partnerships and Committed Friendships. Centerforfaith.com, you want to check it out. It won't cost you an email, so no problem Uh, yeah, I'm more than happy for my audience to, uh, actually read this article and what we explicitly say that we're not advocating for, but I'll leave that for the audience, Jared. We, uh, I guess we will once again, agree to disagree would really,

really love for you to represent my viewpoints correctly. And then I'm fine, perfectly comfortable with the agreement to disagreement. But please do, before you and before God, don't lie about what I believe. I did represent you accurately on that. That is a bold-faced lie on your part. I'm not going to back down from that

because you can say you're not advocating, but then you spend 40-something pages advocating. All right, Jared, I got to run. Thank you so much for your time. Really appreciate you. Okay. Hey, friends. I wanted to offer some afterward type thoughts on this conversation. It's been a few hours since I got done recording with my guest and a bunch of stuff came to my mind. I'm like, man, I'd love to just kind of clear up some things for y'all. So in no particular order, I want to first of all begin by apologizing again for the real immature comment that I made about Jared's hermeneutic professor at Southern Seminary. Not only was that just immature and dumb,

it could be taken as a negative statement towards Southern Seminary. And I just absolutely didn't mean that. And I apologize for saying it. I have lots of respect for many, many professors at Southern. I have many friends that went there. Dear, dear people in my life that I have mad, mad respect for teach at Southern or have gone to Southern. So that was dumb. And I apologize for making that comment. Also, just to clarify, so I didn't bring Jared on to debate our differences. That was not the purpose of this conversation. That was, yeah, would never have done that. Would never have brought him on to debate. I'm not really interested in that at all. So there was a few times that I know he wanted to debate certain points and I just didn't

want to go there. There's other times I think we kind of did go there and you saw how it went. That's exactly why I don't want to debate differences. All I wanted to do is to challenge him to stop lying about what I actually believe. So I hope that was clear. Yeah, there's times when he wanted to debate certain points and that's just, I'm just not interested in debating with him. I'm not really, I don't like the debate genre personally. Some people are love it and they're really good at it. Uh, Sean McDowell is a great example of, I think somebody who handles, uh, debates very well. Um, I think he's honest, he's forthright, he's clear. He can think well on his feet. I just, for me personally, I just, I've never been interested in those kinds of like debate conversations. I don't mind written debates

where you can have time, you know, you have time, like where you post a blog post or something and somebody else responds or obviously, you know, critical reviews of something I've written. I, I, I like that better personally. Um, but I only like to do that with people that are acting in good faith that are genuinely trying to understand what you are saying and can offer helpful critique with counter evidence to, in a mutual pursuit of the truth. And in my opinion, maybe you feel differently. In my opinion, I don't think Jared would be someone who I am convinced is genuinely trying to represent what I actually say and believe and is offering really helpful, rational, theologically precise counterpoints to the opposite.

So yeah, so I don't like debates in general, and I certainly would not be interested in having a debate with Jared. But again, that's not why I wanted to have Jared on. Some people might be wondering, well, why didn't you just have Rosaria on? It's a great question. First of all, I mean, Jared was the one who posted all this stuff about me. And he was quoting, he was kind of summarizing Rosaria's talk that she gave, I believe. And he endorsed it. He very clearly endorsed it. And his post got a ton of attention, like almost half Um, and he endorsed it. He very clearly endorsed it. Um, and his post got a ton of attention, like almost half a million views. So it's kind of like,

yeah, it was a, it was a big deal on social media. Um, and I took this to mean that he also believes these things. Uh, Rosario is not on Twitter. It's not like she posted it and I could respond to her. I mean, he posted it, got a ton of attention. And so I decided to just respond to him. Um, and second, you know, I'm not the one running around and calling people heretics. So if Rosaria or others think I'm a heretic, uh, I would hope that they would contact me and discuss that with me. Um, but, uh, she hasn't and that's fine. I don't, I don't, um, whatever, like I don't, I don't really care. Um, but just so you know, I have contacted Rosaria recently to invite her to have, have a conversation. So, um, I didn't want to talk with Jared and not Rosaria. It was

just, he's the one that posted on Twitter. So it was easy for me to just respond to him and have him come on the show and talk about this. I do want to say this. I, I, if, um, if you are, uh, if I can say a heresy hunter and, um, want to come on my podcast to do the same thing or whatever, just please like, don't, this is not what I normally do. This was an exception to the rule. And I'll talk in a second about whether I even should have done this conversation. Um, I, yeah. So I like, I get called a heretic every day on social media and stuff. It's not like if you just yell and yell loud enough and scream loud enough and say something really obnoxious and get a bunch of hits on your post against me that I'm going to be like, Oh, how dare you? I'm going to have you on my pocket like that. This is not normal. Okay,

so please, I don't want to give people the impression that if you just get enough attention on social media that I'm going to invite you to come on the podcast or even really notice it. Like I've honestly muted so many people that most, that I, I, most of the stuff I don't even see. In fact, I, I know it's almost always somebody else that like reaches out and contacts me. Like, I didn't even know about Rosario's comments until somebody, you know, sent me a clip or whatever. And then I looked, I looked on social media and I saw Jared's post, whatever. Like, I don't, I don't, I don't go looking for this stuff and I've muted so many people that I just, I don't see almost, I hardly see all the weird accusations that I get on,

on social media. Um, so I mean, honestly, when I, when I saw Jared's post, I almost just kept, I didn't really think about it. Cause it just, it didn't seem my, my general policy is I assume accounts are a bot unless they prove themselves otherwise by using humanizing speech. And so by how bizarre some of the claims were made, I just, I didn't think it was a real account. I did a little more research and I was like, Oh no, I think this is actually a real person. So, um, yeah. So all I have to say, if you're a heresy hunter and now you're like, Oh good. I want to, I want to do what Jared did. Like just, just don't, I mean, it's free country. You do whatever you want, but you're, you're just, you're wasting your time. Um,, oh, good. I want to do what Jared did. Just don't. I mean, it's free country. You do whatever you want, but you're wasting your time. It did come up. I mean, there's several

things as I reflect on the conversation, and it's kind of already a bit of a blur, but there was one time when I made this comment that I wouldn't even invite him to speak at the Exiles conference. I think that was just a distraction. I know he returned to that a few times. And just to be clear, it's not that like, oh, I normally would invite Jared to come and speak at Theology in Raw, but he's kind of unkind on social media. I think that's how he took it. Or I think I might have made that comment, like look at your Twitter feed and your tone and stuff. Like that's just scratching the surface why I would never have Jared speak at X-House. I mean, I think he represents a brand of Christianity that is just so categorically different from the brand of Christianity that I

find close to the heart and truth of Jesus. I think he would say the exact same thing about me. I think we'd be very much in agreement on that. But also, I just don't find his reasoning skills to be up to par with the kind of speakers I find interesting enough to speak at Exiles. And I typically don't invite speakers to speak at Exiles who've publicly called me a heretical liar. Like that's just typically not my MO. So I don't, I, I, I was a little shocked that he was shocked that I wouldn't have him speak at exile. So I kind of threw me off a little bit. So, um, yeah, anyway, I don't think there's much more I need to say about that. I just, I, I, that is one of the many times that I feel like, you know, I maybe made a comment that started to take us down a direction that I just wasn't really wanting to go. Uh, there were two

other things I wanted to get to where I think, uh, where I would say Jared, I think is just grossly misrepresenting, uh, people to the point of lying about what people believed. And this has to do with, uh, uh, Rachel Gilson, who's a friend of mine. And, uh, he posted something about Rachel Gilson saying she legitimizes gay marriage. I'm like, what? This is the, that was so odd. Rachel Gilson has been extremely clear where she stands on the question of same sex, uh, marriage. So I'm like, where are you getting this from? Like, I mean, she's written a book on it. She's written several articles everywhere. She speaks like I I've never heard anybody even misread Rachel. So I was like, what is this clip that he has here? Is it a seven-minute clip of Rachel speaking?

So I listened to it, and I'm like, where are you getting this from, even in the clip? Like in the clip, it's during a Q&A time during one of Rachel's talks, and the person asking the question said, really, honestly, it was a beautiful pastoral moment where the person with the question said, hey, I have two moms. They're married. I mean, my mom's lesbians are married to each other.

How do I think through this? It was a really genuine question from this guy. Like, help me to think through this. I love my parents, but I also don't agree with gay marriage. And so how do I navigate this? How do I love them without sacrificing my convictions? I'm kind of summarizing the gist of what he was saying and what would happen if they came to Christ? Like, do they divorce? You know, I don't think divorce is right or whatever. So it's that context that she was kind of interacting with the only other that, I mean, honestly, and I'm trying to say, where are you getting this? That Rachel is legitimizing gay marriage. The only thing I could think of, and this is what I wanted to hear from him is that, um, she, Rachel was working with in

her response. That question was working with the assumption that the, this couple is legally married, which is factually true. The law of the land is that two people the same size can get married. That's the law. That's the legal marriage determined by the state. Now, both Rachel and I and probably many others would say that's one category of marriage. Now, that doesn't mean it's theologically correct. It doesn't even mean they're, quote unquote, married before the eyes of God. But if they did come to Christ, there could be some legal decisions that need to be made. And maybe one option would be if they came to Christ, whatever, um, they would need to be legally divorced because they are legally married by the state. I mean, that's the only thing I could think that where he would say Rachel Gilson is

legitimizing gay marriage. That's my best kind of good faith interpretation of, um, that's my best kind of good faith interpretation of, um, Jared's interpretation of that. So I don't know. I thought that was just really, really bizarre. Uh, but he's gone after, I mean, Sam, Sam Allberry, he's gone after, uh, Rebecca McLaughlin. He, I mean, there's, if he just, yeah, the, the few minutes I spent scrolling his, uh, feed, which I did for a few minutes, I won't ever do it again. I was like, oh my word, this guy's just like attacking so many, I would say very conservative Christians. Another area I did kind of want to get to is just the definition of heresy. And even that, like, I don't, I don't know, given kind of the nature of the conversation, would that even been profitable to talk about? where are you getting your definition of heresy from? He was slinging it around like, yeah, just I think in ways that the early church

wouldn't have recognized. You know, what's interesting is that the English word heresy comes from the Greek word, uh, hereticon. Hereticon occurs once in the new Testament, Titus three 10. You know what it refers to? You know how you translate it? It's translated a divisive person, a hereticon. A hereticon is literally a divisive person. And Paul says, you know, what did he say? They should be warned twice before separating from him. So I'm not saying that's what the modern word heretic means, but those would be the ultimate kind of roots of that term.

You see heresy used throughout church history. Irenaeus used, you know, he talked about the heresy of Gnosticism, which is heresy. John of Damascus called Islam a heresy. Calvin and the Reformers, you know, with Michael Servetus called him a heretic because he was denying the Trinity. Like these are fundamental breaches, you know, against the basic Orthodox cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith. And to say, you know, against the basic Orthodox cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith. And to say, you know, that I'm a heretic because I believe that same-sex sexual or same-sex attraction, um, while being maybe part of the fall is not a morally culpable sin that people need to repent from. Um, but same-sex lust is sin, same-sex sexual behaviors are sin,

all sin outside of a male-female marriage is sin, like affirming all these things that are really fundamental, I would say, to a Christian worldview to say on these more final points that I'm still a heretic or because I invite speakers to a conference where there are differences of different viewpoints represented and some speakers might put pronouns in their bio and therefore I'm a heretic. Just that whole reasoning I find, yeah, I just find bizarre and uninteresting to really interact with. So, and even the claim, like I didn't, I didn't even, I didn't even mess with the claim really, because again, I don't want to drag into some debate that was

just unprofitable, but saying like church history disagrees with me, church history, would have called me a heretic. That's just simply untrue. Like, um, the, the, my best faith interpretation of what he's saying is maybe his version of what I believe, which I obviously don't trust, don't think is close to what I actually believe. Maybe his version, the way he would summarize my beliefs and he'd go back and then he would interpret early church writers or church writers, whatever, to say, see, here's what they're saying, which I don't even trust that. I don't trust his interpretation of written texts. And then here's what Preston says, which I obviously don't trust that. And then therefore, so, I mean, you have to build a pretty, um, uh, interesting, um, case to say

that my, the beliefs that I hold are deemed heretical by church history. I mean, even the categories of sexual orientation weren't really... The categories themselves weren't really explored until the mid to late 19th century. So the very category of same-sex attraction as a kind of temptation that some people might wrestle with being distinguished from same-sex lust, same-sex sexual behavior, or even an active desire to have sex with somebody of the same sex, like however you want to word it. The category of same-sex attraction as distinct from all of those other areas, that's not something that the church writers were even, those aren't the categories they were wrestling with. So, but anyway, that, again, it's like, if I got dragged into that debate, just be a, he said, she said, show me

the text, you know, interpret that correctly. I don't know. I don't, you know, it would just not be profitable. So at the end of the day, my last point here is, should I have done this? day, my last point here is, should I have done this? I honestly don't know folks. Uh, maybe, maybe not, you know, on the one hand I ignore, I mean, I, you know, uh, hardly a day goes by when, when somebody with a social media account and a keyboard and internet connection, you know, calls me a heretic and, you know, I try to stay off that stuff. So I don't see it all the time, but when I go, you know, if I Google my name, I'll come up with all kinds of weird stuff people say about me. So, um, and I just, I've gotten so used to just ignoring it. It doesn't, it honestly doesn't even bother me anymore. It's maybe the way I'm wired. Maybe it's resilience. Maybe it's just because some of it's so just bizarre that it's

like, I don't even give that a time of day. Um, and I have, I, I've, I've been able to ignore that for several years now, every now and then I'll slip up, make a comment. But I try really hard not to engage in these kind of conversations on social media. So I do ignore that. But here's what I was thinking. I was saying, once in a while, is there a place to call this stuff out? while is there a place to call this stuff out that that was what i was thinking when i when i invited jared to come on the podcast i'm like i don't know like he's just getting away with just saying things that saying what i believe that i just factually don't believe like is there a place to say no you don't get to do that just because you have an internet connection doesn't mean you get to say you press and sprinkle believes this and when i don't believe that at least represent me correctly and then call me i heard it it totally fine. That doesn't really bother me. Um, so that's what I was thinking. But honestly, I woke up the next day and I was like,

51% of me was like, I'm glad I did that. 49% was, ah, I know how this is going to go. It's going to be a waste of time. This is not going to be profitable. It's probably not going to be good for my soul. Not going to be good for his soul. Who's going to benefit from this? So yeah, on the one hand, I was like, is there a place to once in a while call this out? I don't know. Maybe on the other hand, I do think back and like, was this worth now the two hours of the time I put into it? Was there more profitable things I could have done for the kingdom in these two hours? And you know what? Probably so. Probably so. So with that, speaking of more profitable things, my son is waiting to play ping pong with me right now. And here I am talking to all y'all. So I'm going to tune out, tune off, tune off. I'm going to sign off and go play ping

pong with my son. So thanks for listening to Theology in the Raw. I hope, I do. I hope that God might redeem the last two hours of the time you spent to listen to all this stuff. And if not, I do apologize for wasting your time. So hopefully the next podcast on Theology in the Raw will be more worth your time. So thanks for listening to Theology in the Raw. We'll see you next time on the podcast. This show is part of the Converge Podcast Network.