Thinking Out Loud with Alan Shlemon - What Are My Concerns with Andy Stanley’s Unconditional Conference?

Episode Date: October 27, 2023

Alan attended Andy Stanley’s Unconditional Conference, an event intended to equip parents and ministry leaders how to reach out to LGBTQ youth. In this episode, Alan provides his assessment of the conference, including three major concerns.

Last month, I attended Andy Stanley's Unconditional Conference. This was an event intended to equip the church to minister to LGBTQ youth. Now, I'd like to provide an assessment of that conference in this episode of my podcast, Thinking Out Loud with Alan Schliemann. Back in 2014, I attended Matthew Vines' conference on the Bible and homosexuality. Now, his stated goal was to, quote, promote inclusion of LGBTQ people by reforming church teaching, end quote. And of course, their organization or his organization that he started called the Reformation Project teaches that homosexual sex and same-sex marriage are biblically permissible. And the organization's goal is to mainstream this theology into the church. And that intent is overt and clear.

into the church, and that intent is overt and clear. Now, fast forward to last month when I attended the Unconditional Conference that was put on by Embracing the Journey. So Embracing the Journey is the organization that put on the conference, and it was hosted at Andy Stanley's church. And of course, Andy Stanley did also speak at the church. Now, Andy Stanley's church boasts a weekly attendance of nearly 40,000 people. And the event was trying to create, or at least this is what they said, was trying to create a theologically neutral space where parents and teachers could learn how to minister to youth who identify as LGBTQ. In other words, their stated intent was not to change anyone's theology, and they repeated that over and over again. Now, before I explain my concerns, I want to highlight some positive elements of the conference. So, for example, I appreciated the focus on leaning into your relationships with friends and family who identify as LGBTQ.

I think that's a good thing. I think too often believers shy away from these relationships or worse, they just simply end the relationships by their either callous or disrespectful behavior. And so I'm glad that at this conference, the speakers who were teaching there were encouraging Christians to change course in this regard. The conference also provided many practical do's and don'ts. For example, if your child tells you they experience same-sex attraction, or if they're confused about their gender identity, the conference was like, hey, look, don't freak out. Don't lecture your child immediately. Don't assume that they're simply engaging in homosexual sex or that they're transitioning.

Instead, the speakers told us, hey, you should thank them for being vulnerable. Invite them to share more of their story. You know, listen and reassure them that you love them. And these are all true and important principles that I've actually taught in my own teaching and in my own speaking and have included also in my own writing for nearly two decades. So I think the conference got these points and several others correct. So it's not like everything they said and did was entirely wrong. and did was entirely wrong. But despite these good elements, the conference was deeply problematic because of the false and somewhat hidden premise that permeated most of the teaching. And here's the premise. Followers of Christ can participate in homosexual sex, same-sex marriage, or transgender transitioning.

And that premise undergirds three serious concerns I have with the Unconditional Conference. Now, the first concern I have is that the Unconditional Conference claimed to be theologically neutral, but wasn't. Now, virtually every aspect of the conference operated on this sort of unspoken premise that it's permissible for followers of Jesus to satisfy LGBTQ desires. In fact, the conference website says, quote, no matter what theological stance you hold, we invite you to listen, reflect, and learn as we approach this topic from the quieter middle space, end quote. And in fact, even the Embracing the Journey founder, Greg McDonald, said,

quote, And he said this from the main stage. David Gushy also said a very similar thing as well during one of his breakout sessions. But despite this claim, the hidden premise that permeated the conference was that walking with Jesus can include same-sex marriage as well as transgender transitioning. Now, not only did no one say anything to the contrary, but virtually every speaker, facilitator, volunteer, everybody who spoke, spoke in a way that led the attendees to believe that those behaviors are permissible. So, for example, Greg and Lynn McDonald, they talked at length about their son who is, quote unquote, married to another man. And they showed family pictures of their son and explained how, although they made a lot of parental mistakes at first, they now have a very positive relationship with him. And they never said anything about their son's quote unquote marriage not being valid or that anything was suspect or sinful about his

current expression of homosexuality. Another example was David Gushy, who previously had announced at Matthew Vines' conference back in 2014 that I attended. David Gushie there announced his change of his position to a quote-unquote gay-affirming view. Now, around that same time, he published a book of his called Changing Our Mind. And in this book, he calls for the inclusion of LGBT Christians. And in the book, he advances this kind of quote unquote fresh interpretation of the Bible supporting his new view. Now at the Unconditional Conference, he assured the audience that quote, this conference is not about changing anyone's theology, end quote. And although he never made a biblical case for his pro-gay view,

he made several vague references to dangerous and harmful theology. So, for example, he argued that Christians once advanced biblical arguments for slavery and anti-Semitism. But because of the harm it caused people, he said Christians returned to scripture for a fresh consideration, a fresh interpretation. And so the implication was that the interpretation that homosexual sex is sin also harms people, and it should also be reconsidered, right? We should also look at scripture again for a fresh consideration, right? And in fact, his book, which focuses on changing your mind and everybody who was at the conference to his theology, that book was sold at the conference. Furthermore, there were two of the conference speakers, Justin Lee, as well as Brian Neitzel, who are both, quote unquote, married to other men. Now, their teaching and their presence there wasn't billed as a sort of like perspective from the other side of the issue.

Rather, they were held up as authorities on the subject who could help parents better understand their own LGBTQ children. And since no one at the conference said or implied that their marriages were not valid or that we shouldn't see them as models for LGBTQ kids, parents could reasonably conclude that same-sex marriage is an option for their children. And so what the unconditional conference was doing was tantamount to a pro-life conference inviting, as one of their speakers, a Planned Parenthood employee who not only had had an abortion, but also taught as if it were a good, moral, and God-honoring decision. And attendees would reasonably conclude that this pro-life conference believed abortion is an appropriate option. What this abortion analogy also shows is that many pro-choice arguments sound persuasive because, like the Unconditional Conference,

they're based on hitty but faulty premises. For example, pro-choice advocates often will claim that women should have the freedom to choose or that women should have the right to control their own bodies. Now, notice in these types of defenses for abortion, the fundamental question of what is the unborn is not addressed, which of course, this is the key question. But these advances or these arguments for abortion are completely ignoring that question. And worse, the pro-choice advocates simply assume that the unborn is not a human being. And then they just kind of carry on making their case with that hidden premise.

The Unconditional Conference approached their topic in exactly the same way. For two days, the speakers addressed how to minister to people who identify as LGBTQ, but intentionally didn't address the fundamental question of whether homosexual sex or same-sex marriage is sin. Worse, they simply assumed they are not sin and then carried on offering advice with that hidden premise. Now, one final example is worth mentioning, and that is this parent panel discussion that I went to that was on the topic of the transgender journey.

And approximately 75% of the parents in that room either shared their story about their own transgender child, or they spoke up in some way. Now, when I got there, I thought to myself, okay, surely there must be some parents here who are attending this conference and who don't think that satisfying transgender ideation is consistent with their Christian convictions. Surprisingly, though, not one person said something to lead me to believe that they thought that their child's social or hormonal or surgical transition was problematic. None. They all just kind of talked and operated as if all those things were just fine.

They all just kind of talked and operated as if all those things were just fine. Preferred pronouns were accepted. And according to one parent, failing to use preferred pronouns is tantamount to violence. There was no pushback to transgender ideation. And these parents simply accepted the transgender experience and sort of, I don't know, baptized it with Christian lingo by saying things like, Jesus would love them. Now, to be fair, parents did say that they were emotionally distraught and that they struggled to understand their child's experience. But the counsel of the facilitators and other parents that were in the room

was merely to love their child and cope during the transition, not at all to uphold biblical principles or to disciple their children accordingly. Now, perhaps the best evidence that the conference, the Unconditional Conference, was not theologically neutral was the response from leaders who advance pro-LGBTQ theology in the church. And while at the conference, I asked one of them, right? I said, look, do you believe this conference aligns with your goal? Like, is this the kind of conference that you want to see? Is this the kind of stuff that your ministry, quote unquote ministry, and organization is trying to advance? And they said, yes.

And of course, this makes perfect sense, right? The Unconditional Conference is advancing their goal. And also, I noticed that after the conference, one progressive Christian who was there, he was one of the attendees of the conference, he posted the following summary on Twitter. He said, quote, every speaker, video, book, and breakout I saw fully informed LGBTQ plus folks. I saw pastors advocating for inclusion, parents welcoming their children's same-sex partners into the family, trans folks sharing their transition stories, and queer people leading at literally every level, end quote. That was a progressive Christian's summary of the conference, right? This was clearly not a theologically neutral conference. It's precisely what LGBTQ

leaders want to see in the evangelical church, because it's in the evangelical church where they believe that there is some sort of stronghold of biblical fidelity that is resisting normalizing homosexuality and transgenderism in the church. And so the Unconditional Conference did take a position on this matter, but of course they attempted to downplay that position. Now, my second concern is that the Unconditional Conference advanced a false dichotomy of possible responses to a child who identifies as LGBTQ. Now, most of the speakers described two different approaches to ministering to kids who identify as LGBTQ.

There was the traditionalist script, and then there was this new script. And the traditionalist script was characterized as unbiblical, unloving, and borderline abusive, if not abusive in itself. In fact, Andy Stanley said that the traditionalist script has a limited vocabulary that includes only four words. And those four words are homosexuality is a sin. And parents who follow this script typically don't listen to their kids when they come out as gay, right? Rather, these parents simply just lecture their kids about the

clobber passages. They don't talk about the love of Jesus. They lack empathy and basically push their kids to the brink of running away. And so the speakers provided numerous disturbing and, I guess, real life examples of what this traditional script amounts to. In one case, somebody talked about how this father kicked his lesbian daughter down the stairs. In another example, there was a gay son who came to a hospital and he was there to visit his dying father. And he asked if he could go into the hospital room. And his father told the nurse to tell this gay son who, again, this father is about to die. And the father tells the nurse to tell the person at the door, who's the son, to say to him, I don't have a son.

In other words, this dying father was still disowning his son even at the moment that he was about to die. And so these are the kinds of examples that were given about what the traditional script is like. Now, the new script that was advanced by the conference and the speakers has a larger vocabulary, we're told. And it doesn't focus on the clobber passages. Rather, it encourages parents to love their child and lean into a healthy parent-child relationship and invite their child to walk with Christ. with Christ. And the way the speakers talked about the new script implied that Christian parents can support their child's eventual same-sex marriage or gender transition. Now, this new script was made to sound natural, appealing, biblical, and a lot easier, right? After all, no parent wants to turn their back on their child. They want to show love,

especially when their child is experiencing want to show love, especially when their child is experiencing emotional turmoil about their attractions or about their gender identity. Now, the problem is, is that the new script fails to describe the details of what walking with Christ would look like for a child who experiences same-sex attraction or has transgender ideation. Worse, this new script was falsely presented as the only alternative to the traditional script. And I want to say there is a third way. All right. There is a third script if I wanted to use the conferences lingo. Okay. And this third script was not addressed at the conference. Right. And this new script entails loving your child and not compromising

what scripture teaches. In fact, I've been advancing this approach for nearly two decades, though I'm not trying to suggest that I invented it or that it's original to me. Lots of people have been advancing this approach. And this approach does incorporate some of the new elements. I'm sorry, some of the elements of that new script that they were talking about at the conference. For example, yeah, parents should love their child. Yes, parents should lean into their relationship with their child. And yes, show them how to walk with Jesus. Those are all absolutely true. But this third way, however, adds some other important biblical elements. For example, parents should encourage their child to put their trust in Jesus as Lord

and as Savior. And in fact, once their child is a follower of Christ, they need to be taught that to love Jesus means to obey his commands. This is John 14. The parents should also educate their child about those commands. And of course, those commands should include, but not limited to, those that are relevant to a person who identifies as LGBTQ. And since the Christian life includes things like temptation to sin in thought and in deed, the parents should also give examples of what sin and repentance looks like. Parents should explain what sanctification is and model it in their own lives. They can show their child how to depend on others in the body of Christ for love and prayer and accountability, right? They'll need that.

In fact, any child who is experiencing same-sex attraction or gender ideation will definitely need that kind of support, as every believer needs that kind of support. Because after all, following Christ is not easy. Like Jesus says, if anyone wishes to come after me, he must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me. It's Matthew 16, 24, right? And so we must be willing to give up anything, even our life, if we want to walk with Jesus. Now, granted that that's tough, but parents can tell their child that it's worth it because Jesus is worth it. And finally, parents should also routinely remind their child that God loves them and model that love in how they parent. Now, all these things that I just described, just kind of as a summary of this sort of third approach or third script, are they easy?

No. In fact, I would say they're very difficult and they make life very, very messy. But I would argue, though, that this approach is consistent with what scripture says. And in fact, believers, as I said, have been following this approach for a very long time. And what is unfortunate is the stories of these families who do practice this approach, those stories are not told at conferences because the attention is always on parents who either follow the traditionalist abusive script or they follow the new script, which sounds all wonderful. Meanwhile, though, there's Christian parents around the globe who

are quietly following the third approach. They're loving their kids and they're being faithful to biblical sexual ethics. Now, perhaps what's going on here is that the Unconditional Conference has inadvertently adopted the culture's false definition of love. Remember, love doesn't accept everything a person believes or does. It doesn't condone sinful behavior. Rather, you can still love someone even if you disagree with what they do. And I'd argue parents have been following that principle since parenting began, right? In fact, parents typically call out their child's bad behavior because they love them, right? And that's a biblical principle. God, after all, right, he disciplines those he loves.

biblical principle. God, after all, right, he disciplines those he loves. This is Hebrews 12, 4 through 7. And of course, I think parents should follow that same model and do the same. A third concern I have with the conference is that the unconditional conference wrongly presumed that you can divorce theology from how you minister. Now, after listening to a presentation that was offering practical advice on how to minister to LGBTQ, after listening to a presentation that was offering practical advice on how to minister to LGBTQ youth, I asked the speaker a question. I said, look, how would your advice be different if I were ministering to a teen with same-sex attraction, but I held the view that homosexual sex was sin? Now, surprisingly, he said to me, nothing would change. In other words, on his assessment, the theological question of whether homosexual sex is sin

would not affect how you minister to a person who experiences same-sex attraction. Now, in hindsight, I guess his answer makes sense considering his view. The conference speakers repeatedly said this is a theologically neutral conference. Andy Stanley, in his sermon the following Sunday, said this was not a Bible or theology conference, but rather a pastoring conference. Now, even if that's true, how you minister to someone is dependent on your theology. And your theology should be dependent upon what the Bible teaches. For example, conference speakers repeatedly told attendees that they should love others, which of course includes their children. Well, presumably they got that practical advice from their theology, which they got from the Bible. Well, it turns out

that the Bible teaches many other doctrines that are relevant to how to minister to people who identify as LGBTQ. Specifically, the Bible advances a positive case defining sex and marriage and a negative case as to which sexual activity is prohibited. Now, how can these verses not affect your theology and consequently your practical advice as you minister to LGBTQ youth? I mean, the conference speakers want to tell parents to love their kids. Well, fair enough. But what happens if your son wants to date a man?

What if your daughter wants to marry a woman? What if your child wants to take cross-sex hormones and or surgically transition? What if your child wants to take cross-sex hormones and or surgically transition? Notice how you advise and counsel your child in those circumstances will depend entirely on your theology. As stated earlier, though the conference was touted to be a theologically neutral conference, it wasn't. Still, they operated on the mistaken premise that you can provide practical ministry advice without considering the biblical text on those topics.

Either the organizers of this conference are ignorant of how theology affects ministry, or they're being dishonest about their neutrality because they want to quietly advance pro-gay or pro-trans theology. Now, I'm not saying I know their intent, but either way, I cannot trust the unconditional conference. Now, given these three concerns I've presented, many people ask if sexual behavior, like for example, homosexual sex or same-sex marriage or transgender transitioning, is an agree to disagree topic. After all, the conference presumes to take a theologically neutral approach. In other words, we can disagree on theology, like on these

theological matters pertaining to this topic, but we can agree it doesn't matter for the purposes of the conference. Now, personally, I do not think that sexual ethics is an agree to disagree topic because I don't think that the Bible treats it that way. And in fact, I would suggest that the scripture emphasizes three points that support this conclusion that I've come to. Here's the first point. Scripture is univocal in its positive case for sex and marriage in both the Old and New Testaments. You see, the Genesis account of creation teaches that God made man and woman and decreed that a

man leave his parents, cleave to his wife, and the two become one flesh. This is from the first two chapters of Genesis. Now, in the New Testament, Jesus quotes these exact two passages. This is Matthew 19, verses 4 through 6. So, Jesus quotes these two passages because he believes they are still authoritative passages. And so, when it comes to sex and marriage, Jesus says it's about one man with one woman becoming one flesh for one lifetime. And the only pair of people that are described in scripture capable of creating a one flesh union

consists of a man and a woman. The Bible doesn't leave room for differing viewpoints. Its teaching on sex and marriage alone disqualifies homosexual sex and same-sex marriage, even before considering these sort of prohibition texts. A second reason why I don't think this is an agree to disagree issue is that scripture is univocal in its negative case. In other words, it prohibits homosexual sex and consequently that behavior in same-sex marriage. Both the Old and the New Testaments teach that homosexual behavior is a sin. Now, although there are numerous passages that address homosexuality, five common ones are Leviticus 18.22, Leviticus 20.13, Romans 1.26-27, 1 Corinthians 6.9-11, and 1 Timothy 1.8-10. And it's important to note that these five passages

categorically condemn any type of homosexual sex, not just abusive, coercive, or exploitive kinds of homosexual sex, as many pro-gay theology advocates like to argue. Now, regarding people who take on the identity of the opposite sex through their dress or behavior, scripture refers to that behavior as sin, as an abomination. This is Deuteronomy 22.5 and says they will not inherit the kingdom of God. This is 1 Corinthians 6, 9 through 11. So the Bible's definitive voice prohibiting homosexual sex and transgender transitioning doesn't leave any room for disagreement. In fact, it says people who practice such things are in spiritual peril. So let me give you a third reason why I think this is not an agree to disagree topic.

Scripture warns that those who engage in ongoing sexual sin will not inherit the kingdom of God. Okay. In other words, this is a very serious issue. Now, one of the conference speakers did not think that homosexual sex is a salvation issue. And when answering a question about the lack of agreement in the church about same-sex relationships, he said, quote, this is not a core or salvation issue, end quote. Now, that might explain why they claim to offer a theologically neutral conference, right? Scripture, however, though, warns that people who engage in sexual sin endanger their eternal destiny.

So, for example, in Ephesians 5, verses 3 through 5, Paul warns believers that there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality among them. And by the way, the phrase sexual immorality is translated from the Greek word porneia, which is a term that first century Jews and Christians understood to refer to the sexual prohibitions of Leviticus 18. And if you know, Leviticus 18 has several sexual prohibitions against bestiality, incest, homosexual sex, and adultery. So Paul concludes this thought by saying, no person engaging in those sexually immoral acts has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

So that is very serious. In 1 Corinthians 6, 9- 11, Paul begins with a very similar warning. He says, do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? And then Paul lists a bunch of people who will not inherit God's kingdom, including he has the words fornicators and homosexuals. Now there's two things to take note of here. and homosexuals. Now there's two things to take note of here. First of all, the word fornicators is also from the Greek word porneia, which remember includes homosexual behavior as one of the sins of the Leviticus 18 section. Second, the word homosexuals is from the Greek word arsenikoitai, which literally means men who bed males, which of course is a reference to homosexual sex.

Therefore, this passage, right, this 1 Corinthians 6, 9 through 11 passage, includes two references to homosexual behavior, along with the warning that people who practice such behaviors will not inherit the kingdom of God. Again, notice, very serious, this is a matter of eternal destiny. Now, I would be remiss not to remind people that the very next verse, 1 Corinthians 6.11 says, such were some of you. So, of course, the good news of the gospel is that there is freedom from the guilt of homosexual sex, and those who repent can inherit the kingdom of God. That offer of hope, however, stands in contrast to the person who forgoes repentance and engages in ongoing sexual sin. So therefore, the Bible does not treat homosexual sex or the subject of marriage as an agree

to disagree issue. It's univocal in its definition of sex and marriage. It's also univocal in its prohibition of homosexual sex. And finally, it warns people who engage in such behavior that they will not inherit the kingdom of God. These are serious, serious matters. And to simply agree to disagree would be to disregard the eternal destiny of the very

people whom God is eager to save. By the way, not only are people who engage in ongoing unrepentant sexual sin and jeopardy, but those who even give them false hope are in danger as well. In fact, listen to the stern warning from Jesus. He writes this, or he says this, I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and leads my bondservants astray so that they commit acts of immorality. This is Revelation 2 verse 20. Now again, that phrase acts of immorality is translated from the Greek

word pornea, which is a reference to the prohibited sexual acts of Leviticus 18, one of which is homosexual sex. So Jesus not only believes that the pornea behaviors are sin, but he castigates those who lead people astray to engage in those acts. And so the unconditional conference is giving people who satisfy LGBTQ desires a false hope and leading them astray. Man, the consequences of this are grave. If Jesus doesn't think that this is an agree to disagree issue, neither should we. Neither should we. Now, look, I take no joy in this assessment of the unconditional conference or of what Andy Stanley is trying to do at his church.

I realize that what I'm saying is serious. And honestly, my prayer is that Andy Stanley and Embracing the Journey, which is the organization that put on the conference, that they would recognize that they're mistaken and pursue an approach to reach the LGBTQ community in a way that is consistent with the gospel and consistent with biblical sexual ethics. Sadly, from what I've seen Andy Stanley, you know, how he's responded so far, I don't think that he thinks that there is a problem. In fact, he gave a sermon the very next Sunday after his conference. And in that sermon, he acknowledged, for example, that he knew about the same-sex married speakers before they spoke.

And he knew what they would teach. And he knew the philosophy of the Embracing the Journey organization. But still, Andy proceeded to move forward with the conference, even though he said, quote, biblical marriage is between a man and a woman, end quote. Now, to me, it's mystifying how he reconciles that statement about marriage with inviting a conference into his church that has same-sex married men teach, that incorporates speakers who advance pro-LGBTQ theology, and that recommends books and websites that provide a vigorous defense of that theology. This leads me to believe that Andy Stanley is either naive or he's crafty.

Either way, though, he's dangerous. You see, he's naive if he thinks that he can host the unconditional conference and it will not corrupt the church's teaching on sexual ethics. Or he's crafty and he's using this conference to change the theology of his church and possibly other churches. Either way, he's dangerous. If I wanted to quietly mainstream pro-gay theology and transgender ideology into the evangelical church, I would create this conference. It is the perfect vehicle.

The speakers never exegeted a single Bible verse nor explained the Bible's teaching on sex and marriage, but nevertheless advanced pro-gay and pro-trans theology to the believers in attendance. They sold parents a false security that their kids will be right with God, even if they marry someone of the same sex or if they transition their bodies, but they never provided a biblical case for that view. For those intent on reforming the church to adopt pro-gay and pro-trans theology, this conference was a win. And that's why leaders of LGBTQ organizations that were in attendance were thrilled, right? They were thrilled with the conference because this conference succeeded by

hiding the key premise, right? Creating a false dichotomy, twisting the definition of love, and then leveraging the emotions of parents. Now you combine all of that with the biblical illiteracy that is commonly present in the church. And man, the truth did not stand a chance at that conference. But I believe there's hope if we expose the hidden premise and talk about this third way and offer it as an alternative to the two scripts that were described at the conference, and if we adopt the biblical notion of love and base our theology on scripture, I believe in his final epistle before being executed, Paul writes to his protege Timothy and charges him to, quote, retain the standard of sound words which you've heard from me in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus. Guard through the Holy Spirit who dwells in us the treasure which has been entrusted to you. End quote. This is 2 Timothy 1, 13-14. Now, I agree, that might sound easier than it is,

but it's worth it. It's worth it to stand firm. And by the way, we're called to do it. Well, that's all I have for you today. I hope you've enjoyed this episode. And if you have, please share it with a friend, someone who may have heard about this conference and is wondering what to think about it. Also, don't forget to subscribe to my podcast on your favorite podcast app so that you don't miss any further episodes. And thanks for listening. I look forward to thinking out loud with you next time.