of the LGBTQ+, and it's lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and you can either be referring to queer or questioning, and plus, there's any other option you want to put in there. But it's the sexual revolt of the LGBTQ+. for this. Notice what happened. Brittany Griner gets released from Russia. And I'm not going to get into the political aspects. This is a woman who does not love the United States of America. And you have a Marine, and I don't know what he was involved with. He was a Marine serving the country. So I don't want to get into that. But she is a lesbian who's on her, quote unquote, second marriage. And I cringed when I heard, as you no doubt did, about her wife commenting on things. But what was telling is the response of the president's press secretary. Why was this done for Brittany Griner? And she threw out a word many of us have never heard of, intersectionality. What does that mean? It's critical that we communicate to people our acceptance of and toleration of all forms of sexual practice. And that was given as the reason for this. The second is the Respect for Marriage Act. Well, back in 1996, we had a defensive marriage act that sought to put into law the fact that marriage is between one man and one woman. And the Respect for Marriage Act that passed is about respect for same-sex marriage and the fact that it needs to be honored in every single state. That was done so that there wouldn't be an overriding of the 2016 Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage. So, wow, what a weakness. So, look at this chapter. And it is mind-bending. Let me read Dr. Truman's introduction, pages 129 and 130. And I hope you have the books. I'm going to give you some reading to sign up front. Page 129 and 130. The letters LGBTQ plus. loom large in the cultural and political imagination of our day. The coalition of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and queer people, or questioning people, is without a doubt the greatest political success story of the last half century. In the 1960s, homosexuality was still illegal in many Western countries. Even Barack Obama did not dare to support gay marriage unequivocally until 2012. And yet today, even Du Bois' dissent from trans ideology, and that's different, because you're going to find out, than homosexuality. Trans ideology is likely to earn one a ferocious social media beating and exclusion from polite liberal society. depth and comprehensive scope of the LGBTQ plus triumphant cultural conquest is impressive, and it is. Yet, familiarity with Dr. Truman, with the condition, can easily blind ourselves to its, and I love this word, I've never heard it before, confected. You think of confetti, okay, it's a different color of paper and straw. Confected means a lot of small parts, and they're different types. nature. It is not a coalition of trans and lesbian, gay, and bisexual groups. It is not a movement bound together by a set of intrinsic commonalities shared by its constituent groups, as say the Republican or Democrat party. I'm not sure that that analogy marriage of convenience, we'll come back to that term, or phrase, created by uniquely particular circumstances. Exploring this point is helpful, because it not only helps us to understand the nature of the sexual revolution that we are witnessing today, it also helps us to see what exactly is at stake in all this in terms of where the revolution itself, and it is that, might be heading, and also how this will reshape public attitudes toward traditional freedoms, that's more next week, such as those of speech and religion. Now, let me give you the backdrop here because I want to look at a couple of texts in scripture. Remember ideas. They're like viruses, and we're building up antibodies. What are the ideas? Jean-Jacques Rousseau. You've got to take your feelings seriously. We're not doing the world with feelings. You've got to have maximum freedom to express your feelings, okay? You, jumping ahead a little bit, we go to Karl Marx. Everything is about politics, and everything is material. And the world, there's revolution, you can't overstate this. The world is made up of a series of revolutions. Friedrich Nietzsche, building on that. Will to power. Man can make himself into a superman, and he should do that. Freud, everything is about sexuality and psychology and lesser known but no less important, Wilhelm Reich, oppression. So you've got revolution, you've got oppression in every culture, there's revolution that needs to come. Man is just a material being. You try to change that material being into Superman, okay? Now, those are the ideas that we have been dealing with, okay? And you'll see how those come into play here. Now, I'm going to use a little... I'm going to cover most of the same material, but I want to add to it at points. So I'm going to use a little different outline than Dr. Truman. I never do what SNL was for you. I wrote a Saturday Night Live, which is kind of the political commentary of popular media. But I'm going to talk about SNW, all right? SNW is Strange New World. And we're going to deal with terms, turmoil, and tyranny. I think this is easier to teach in this way. Terms, turmoil, and tyranny. And two texts. One is Genesis chapter 1 and verse 27. You know it by heart, but think about it. God creates man in his own image. In the image of God, he created him male and female. He created them. Now, for people who have the unfortunate lot of life of questioning whether Genesis is true, if they want to be called Christians, they need to be followers of Christ. And notice how Jesus reinforces this. Now the talk is about marriage and divorce, Matthew 19. And Jesus, there he's asked, is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause? And he answered, have you not read that he, as God, who created them from the beginning, made them male and female? But if you don't believe the Genesis account, you've got a real problem with Jesus. And then he goes on and said, therefore a man shall be his father and his mother, and hold fast to his wife, and the two, the man and the woman, shall become one flesh. And it's interesting, Moses wrote that, but Jesus says it's God who said that. He who made them said. That's a rich text in which Jesus reinforces the fact that God made man male and female, each in his own image. Put on your seat belts, folks. Let's look at terms. And you may want to write these in your book, because when Dr. Truman uses these terms throughout, and if you don't realize there's a distinction in them, you'll get very confused very quickly. So there's five terms he uses in this chapter and the terms. And why be familiar with these things? Paul said we're to become all things to all people that by all means we might save some, right? And he says to those who are under the law, I became as one under the law and so far I could live out of his Jewish convictions, he did that I might win those who are under the law. Then he says to those who are without law, or they are outside of the law, they are lawless. I became as one without law those as though not without law to Christ that I might win them. And what he's saying in there is to the extent it doesn't violate a biblical precept given by Christ, then you identify with those who are without law. But the goal is to win them, that by all means, I might win them. And folks, it is wrong to point your finger at the LGBTQ plus community and castigate them. The goal is to see them won. And so we want to understand the lingo that they're using so that we can become all things to all people. And remember, to understand does not mean necessarily to accept. All right, we'll get back to that. OK, five terms. Number one, gender binary. Now, if you look up Merriam-Webster, you're not going to find the phrase gender binary. But Dr. Truman uses it. And what does he mean? Gender binary is Genesis chapter 1 and Matthew 19. God made them male and female. Gender binary, two biologically distinct sexes. Now sex, not as a verb, but as a noun. What is your sex? Sex, what is your sex? And I'm purposely not using gender at this point, but sex is the biological gender, that word is very important, the biological gender with which you were born. And that's, you can determine that. Two X chromosomes is a woman. An XY chromosome is a man. And I have a problem, it's not a theory, chromosomes are something you can look at in a microscope. So sex, the noun, is the biological gender with which you were born, XX, women, XY, male. Now in the fallen world, and folks I've spoken with doctors about this, I've spoken with I've known it to be an ethical issue. And all the Christian ones I've spoken with have all said the same thing. In a fallen world, sometimes there are biological oddities. A person has two sets of reproductive organs, or a malformed male or female reproductive organ, or a female doesn't menstruate, or isn't able to have a baby. We're in a fallen world. So yes, there are some oddities. But historically, we're going to come back to this, these have been dealt with medically. If there has to be an operation on the reproductive organs, you do it. If a woman is not able to menstruate or have a child, sometimes corrections can be made, sometimes not. But you work with it medically. Why? Because it's a biological issue. It's not a psychological one. It has psychological effects. You can't have a child. It affects you psychologically, but the issue is biological. So gender binary and sex are biological. Now, we're going to get a shift. A shift with the modern trans movement. What is gender in the trans movement? Not for everybody. For many people, gender is equal to sex. So how is gender used today? And you've got to get this, or you're going to get confused. Gender today is a social construct, a set of behaviors that society has come to expect from those who possess a certain kind of body. I'll be going over it again. Gender today, not in every case, but it means, especially within feminism or the trans movement, a social construct. a set of behaviors societies come to expect from those who possess a certain kind of body. In other words, you act in a particular way as a male or as a female. And this was the founding document that opened this up. philosopher, Simone de Beauvoir, whose 1949 book, The Second Sex, is pivotal to understand this. And Simone de Beauvoir wrote in a quote-take statement, often quoted, listen carefully, one is not born, but rather becomes woman. No biological, psychic, or economic the figure that the human female takes on in society. It is civilization as a whole that elaborates this intermediary product between the male and the eunuch. That product is called feminine. Now obviously this is a massive change from God made it male and female, but what I want you to notice is this. Notice the language of Marxism in here. The psychic and economic destiny that defines the figure of female takes on in society. What's she getting at? This is the beginning Women are pigeonholed as those who stay home. And what is behind that is oppression. Don't read that. There's truth in that. In many cases, women are treated, have been treated, not with the same dignity as a man is. But here's what's critical for her, for the next writers. It's as a woman, as a biological woman, But this is part of your history and your oppression. And that is critical to understand this. Now, a more modern exponent, and I've read about these as much as I could before the class. My head was spinning. Dr. Truman's just cutting the tip of the iceberg here. Judith Butler is a gender therapist. And it's fascinating to look at her, but it's also fascinating to hear her. She says, quote unquote, your behavior creates your gender. Your behavior creates your gender. And Dr. Truman, page 133, Judith Butler, gender is a performance, a set of behavior that society has come to expect from those who possess a certain kind of body. In so doing, a separation is made. This is critical. A separation is made between sex, biologically determined, and gender, socially constructed, such that the latter, gender, socially constructed, floats free from any biological determination and can be made and remade at will. One is born biologically female. One becomes a woman by learning the performances required by society. Now, folks, to some extent, I was told when I was in premarital counseling, the pastor was a wonderful man. The man doesn't wash the dishes. The woman washes the dishes. Excuse me, where do you get that in the scriptures? Come on, you're supposed to be a helper, a suitable one. You're not heading your household well if you wash the dishes. See, see? We all had it. When she was with us, she couldn't get over that I helped Margaret cook in the hall. She'd never seen that. Men don't help the wife cook, OK? Now, am I saying all men should help the wife cook? No, but don't tell me I shouldn't. OK, so this is what they're getting. So there's truth in this to some extent, OK? Now, but note the influence of Marx. Materialism. You're only this stuff that can be remade at will. Now, they're very inconsistent with this, but at least that's it. Nietzsche, will to power. If you can make yourself into a different gender, do it. The Freud, the psychological self is the real self. Right. There's oppression in the world, and therefore we need revolution. And that brings us to, Dr. Truman doesn't deal with it, but you want to realize that you're mind bent out of shape. Read about the third, fourth, and now fifth waves of feminism that began in the 1990s, in which there were various ways of saying Not only do we have the right to live out of our gender identity that we choose, law is going to recognize that right. And if you don't affirm it, you are oppressiveness. And I'm adamant on this, because this is the mindset in not all of the feminist world. Maybe they'll find out. There's a division between feminists today. I disagree with them. Other than talking about it, I say exactly what you say. But all right. OK, so this is the fun transition, OK? Fourth term, and now your mind gets bent, because these definitions come from the Yogyakarta principles in 2006. And when I read this in Dr. But it isn't. These Yogyakarta principles were developed in Indonesia in 2006 because nations were saying to their representatives, how do we deal with this in our country? How do we deal with people who are born male, born female, people that transition from being a male to a female or female to a male? They're at one another's throats about these things. How should law deal with this. And there were two committees that met together in Indonesia, in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. They did principles in 2006. Ten years later, updates of them. But these were their definitions. Number four, what is sexual orientation? Not sex, not gender binary, not gender, but sexual orientation. And this is what they said, it is the standard definition for sexual orientation. Each person's capacity for profound emotional, affectional, and sexual attraction to and intimate sexual relations with, listen carefully, same gender or more than one gender. Sexual orientation is each person's capacity for profound emotional, affective, and sexual attraction to and intimate sexual relations with individuals of a different gender, of the same gender, or more than one gender. So when you read sexual orientation today, that's how it's being described, of what it is. And we'll make a couple comments on these in a moment. The last one is gender identity. Later, we're going to come to SOGI laws, laws that recognize liberty in sexual orientation and gender identity. What's gender identity? Well, this one will blow your mind. Each person's deeply felt, notice you're going back to the expressive individualism that you do. I don't even know how to use a screwdriver, and a hammer, and a drill. A flute would break all this theory apart. A flute? What do you call it? A flute. Gender identity. Each person's deeply felt, right? This is Rousseau and feelings. Deeply felt internal and individual experience of gender, which may or may not correspond with the sex assigned at birth, including the personal sense of the body. In other words, it doesn't make any difference whether I look at my body and I see a male or female. How do I feel about that? And then in parentheses, in these principles, which may involve, if freely chosen, Nietzsche's will to power, modification of bodily appearance or function by medical, surgical, or other means, and other expressions of gender. The statement is, it's each person's deeply felt internal and individual experience of gender, including other expressions of gender, including dress, speech, and manners. So if I want to wear purple hair, and I want to wear a green dress, and I'm a man, and I want to wear high heels and a sombrero, that's fine. That's the way I feel about myself. I've got to respect that. Now, just a few comments about this. Note here, sexual orientation has no content to it. It's simply each person's capacity for profound emotional, affectual, and sexual attraction to and intimate sexual relations with something else. And I know this is gross, folks. There are people, males, who want to have sexual intimacy with a horse. It's called bestiality. But see, that has to be respected with this view of sexual orientation. It's a subjective desire of attraction to anything. Second, gender is separated from biological sex in both of these. In other words, psychology trumps biology. We're going to come back to it. Very important. So that inner feelings have normative authority. Inner feelings have normative authority. You've got to add one other thing to it. You question this. You make fun of this. You don't permit this in the workplace. You are oppressing me. Remember, you've got Marxism in all of this. OK? So this and that. It's materialistic. The body is just raw material that can be manipulated. Now, in fact, within the LGBTQ community, They don't live consistently out of materialism. There's a profound sadness and lack of satisfaction in that community. But at least theoretically, that's what they say. The body is just raw material that can be manipulated. Remember, plastic people with world biology can be altered to your gender identity, right? If you feel like you're female and you're male, you can change things biologically, you can change things medically. Now, you add technology to that. Technology and medical practices and chemicals can make this technically possible. Nietzsche would be applauding all of this, right? But then add one more thing, where Wilhelm Wright and others comes in. Politics. To make this normal, there must be revolution in society. Hence the profound title of the chapter, The Sexual Revolt of the LGBTQ Plus, right now. Second part, third part, we'll do a lot with it, because I want you to read it. Now, catch your breath, folks. is I was going through this and trying to wrap my head around this stuff. You know, I'm biblicistic enough that there's male and female, OK? And then you try to figure these things out. But all I could think of was Exodus 14, 25, God clogged the chariot wheels of the Egyptians so that they drove heavily. What a great sermon to preach on that. God clogged the chariot wheels of the Egyptians so that they drove heavily. God is clogging the chariot wheels in the other world. Both lesbians and gays, I'll use the term at this point, until the 1980s, there was a certain reference to biological gender. Lesbians saw men as enjoying male privilege. And let me give you an example. Again, I don't want to be graphic, but this is how it works. A man can be gay in the workforce, and most people don't think much about it. He may be not, but he's very much out of it. He used to be covered up. He'd get together with men, get together with women, no big deal. And he was suddenly, you know, we learn of Raymond Berg, who You'd never know that when you watched this tall man with a keen voice. Anyway, so that was male privilege. Women, you are expected to act as a woman in the marketplace. And often that became pre-Dicey, quite frankly. Well, if you're a lesbian and you're attracted to females, you don't want to do that. And so you had male privilege, and you had oppression of women, because if they didn't conform, guess who didn't get the promotions? And quite frankly, in some cases, if you didn't do certain favors for your boss, you didn't get promotions. And I hope that's odious to you when you hear that. But this is what the dynamic, but the dynamic was male privilege and female oppression, all right? 1980s, AIDS comes along. And this is where the marriage of convenience comes in, because you have men who are now victims in a culture. They're victims, frankly, of their own lifestyle. But they're still regarded as victims, and they are oppressed. It comes out that they are homosexuals, they have AIDS, they're treated as second-class citizens. And the lesbians could say, see, now you know what we went through as well. Both now are societal victims. Both are being oppressed. Both are victims of, and here's where the phrase was used, heteronormative patriarchal society. We are victims of a society. that prizes exclusively heterosexual relations and the domination of men. And you hear that phrase almost incessantly in the feminist movement. Heteronormative, hetero means other normative, a man and a woman, patriarchal, the man is the leader. Both were unable to freely express the outworkings of what they felt inwardly. Now, here's the link. Biology has linked them to this point. I'm a female, I'm a lesbian. I'm a male, I'm gay. And there's something about this history as male, as female, that is inseparable from my being as a male or female. But then, then, then, then, here the transition is if I can't express my feelings, I'm being oppressed. OK? But both assumed at least at that time, in the early 1980s, and respected. the importance of biological sexual differences, and the history of females and males. So it was not unusual to have lesbians who would deal with men who were gay, homosexuals, and they appreciated when the man could understand the female's oppression and the female could understand the male's expression, but they went back to biology. This, though, brings about a change. Because by that time, the 1980s, the gender identity as a social construct idea, the ideas of Beauvoir and Butler, who was beginning to write, they entered on scene. Gender identity is a social construct. That brings in the language in the 80s of trans, and later queer, or questioning, in which not biology, but psychology reign. That creates turmoil. This is where I talk about the chariot wheels of the Egyptians being clogged. I don't relate to this. I love the word gay, but not gay in that sense. I'm heteronormative with my wife. I don't get this. But this is real. Gay men did not find a trans man sexually attractive. He knows that she, who is now a he, is really a he. And he is not attracted to trans he. And it's the same with the other. Lesbians don't find trans women attractive, not only because they were once male. These were the people who oppressed them. And they have had inbred in them from feminism a hatred of men as men. All right? So that doesn't stop there, OK? There's not only this turmoil, but this brings, and this is an intramural conflict, so to speak, this brings the accusation of being transphobic. Even in the lesbian gay community, if you are gay, I'll use the term here, and you are not attracted to this woman who has become a man, then you are transphobic and vice versa. And there's interesting books about this whole thing now. What does that mean for today? Feminism is bitterly, bitterly divided. Incidentally, let me read this. I want to be sensitive to time. It's on page 134 in the book. This is a lesbian who lives with a partner who transitioned from female to male. And she writes, remember, plastic people, fluid world. When my partner began his gender transition, my lesbian identity had been central to my life. And incidentally, folks, hetero or homo, your sexuality is not central to your life. It's part of it. But anyway, my sense of self for well over a decade. And I didn't know what his transition made me. Some people told me I was obviously, quote unquote, still a lesbian. But it was just as obvious to others that I was now straight or bisexual. Well, it wasn't obvious to me at all, and I struggled with it for a long time, and now I've been the partner of a trans man for as long as I was a lesbian, and I've gotten comfortable not just having a name for what I think I am, but I think of myself as part of the family of or break your heart. Imagine you're in a counseling session with somebody, and they say this. Don't point your finger at them. Weep. So today, feminism is in bitter division. There are those who affirm trans women, men who become women, as true women, and those who don't. Very important, trans women, a woman who becomes a man, cannot truly identify with female victimhood, where people are treated as victims if they really are because of their biological gender or sex. And as a result, that has created, here's a new one for you, TERFs, T-E-R-F-S. trans-exclusionary radical feminists. And this is a clash of both Marx and Freud together. A trans-exclusionary radical feminist is a biological woman who says a biological man who's trans really can't relate to what makes a biological woman a woman. And then they'll say something pretty obvious. OK. He's a man and he dreams to be a woman. He doesn't know what it is to have a period or nothing. He doesn't know what it is to have a baby. He doesn't know... Hello? That's all we've been saying all along. But now there is that, again, intramural debate within, and it is particularly with the feminists and with males, less so with men. And I'll use Bruce Jenner as an example. We can take with Jenner. Time Magazine has a picture of Bruce Jenner, who, quote, unquote, became Caitlyn Jenner. And there's a seductive picture of Caitlyn Jenner on the cover of Time Magazine. What is that? It's a performance. It's a pose that Jenner took. so that he looked like a female. That was resented by the women who are genuinely biological females. And they said something like this. Now, if I were a black person, I'd resent it, but I get their point. This is like a white person trying to become a black person so that he can understand the black experience, and he really can't do it because he's not black. All right, and so that's what I say. I can read things from some of the, I don't even know what they were called, the trans-exclusionary radical feminists. Some of whom, Dr. Truman quotes, he said, hey, just say what we've said. OK? And some of them would. But again, folks, we have to live in God's world. All right. And then otherwise. And now this flows into political reform. And I'll make this very, very quick. I want you to read pages 139 to 147. And now that you've gotten this, you'll be able to grasp what's going on in those packed chapters. He speaks about SOGI, sexual orientation, and gender identity laws. And that goes back to the Yogyakarta Principles of 2006, and the International Committee of Jurists, and the other body that was there. And it's interesting. They've got the official status. But nations were saying, how do we deal with this in this culture? Because we're not the only ones. They said, how do we get here so quickly? And we're looking at it in perspective of the church, and from Christians, and how do you respond to this? are saying the same thing. How does life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness apply to people that historically have been regarded as perverted people? So these yogyakarta principles, which, frankly, are in back of the current push for many of our laws. Let me read from the preamble, and then all you've got to do is read this, and you'll get the point in here. the preamble to the Yogyakarta principles. This is page 140, the opening paragraph. Listen. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. OK? All human rights are universal, interdependent, indivisible, and interrelated. I'm not sure about that. sexual orientation and gender identity are integral to every person's dignity and humanity Dr. Truman does say, the text then goes on to deplore violence against individuals who deviate from heterosexual norms, as we should deplore it, and points an accusing finger, in principle six, at governments that police sexuality, for example, what Indonesia is wanting to do, and thereby encourage and promote cultures where gender-based violence and inequality are right. Well, certainly, we don't want to have that. But that's part of the admitted purpose here. And again, we can agree with that as far as it goes. Then, as you come to Principle 3, watch how these build. And in the Yogyakarta Principles, everyone has a right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law. Persons of diverse sexual orientation and gender identities shall enjoy legal capacity in all aspects of life. That's the Respect for Marriage Act. Each person's self-defined sexual orientation and gender identity is integral to their personality and is one of the most basic aspects of self-determination dignity, and freedom. Now, I want you to hear the principles, because you know where we're going. This is the way the state is acting. As a Christian, as a pastor, and as a minister, I cannot think of something I more vehemently, vehemently say is false. Folks, I've worked with heterosexual sin, homosexual sin, whether it's lesbian or male. I've done that. I've been there, dealing as a pastor with people. And there is not self-determination. There's a bondage of some sort. As with people with pornography, there isn't dignity. The last thing is dignity. You can't confer it by law. Quite frankly, I want to be careful how I say this, when men have sex with men, there's nothing dignified about it. And it's even dangerous. And freedom, ah. You got a civil freedom. But it's freedom for people to become more enslaved. All right. So that book now on page 142, 143 of the book, the very bottom, this is principle 24. And here's where we're going. The right to found a family. Everyone, remember, respect for marriage. Everyone has the right to found a family. Regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, families exist in diverse forms. No family may be subjected to discrimination on the basis of the sexual orientation or gender identity of any of its members. Now, I think I want respect for human beings, and I'll cut with that. If you go ahead and you legalize, put it bluntly, you want to marry a frog, and you want that recognized by law, forget it. You've abandoned any sense in society. OK, so I want you to read that chapter. It's pages 139 to 147. Let me just wrap up with this. This is on page 144. Let me put some quick words on the end of it. Actually, what he deals with in here, he says, trans ideologies cannot be avoided. That's his last section. Trans ideology cannot be avoided. Boy, this hits you between the eyes. Here's what he says. Trans rights are now civil rights. And those with principled objections have no obvious recourse by which they might protect themselves. Carried through consistently, women's sports will soon be a thing of the past, given the typical disparity of strength between male and female athletes. This is page 146 at the top. That will have an impact on many young women who depend upon athletic scholarships to fund their education. Now, this is my parenthetical note. This is going to fuel more and more revolt by females against males. See? Chariot wheels clogged. More tragically, young girls and boys at school now find that the one place They might have expected society to work hard to grant them privacy and protection, school restrooms are the very places where society has not simply abdicated its responsibility, but has actually created a legal culture opposed to such. And the same applies to women's prisons. A man believes he is a woman. He is a criminal. By law, he is in most cases, he must be put in a woman's prison. And then you wonder why there's rapes. Now, I want to be careful when I say this. This is idiocy. But this is what happens. when, in this case, the psychological triumphs over the biological. All right, let me give you the antidote real quickly. It's not really the antidote, but you will actually get on it in a lot of ways today. The antidote is the way the Christian faith has always addressed these issues. Nothing new. Ask Dr. Gaffney how Christian pediatricians historically have dealt with abnormalities in reproductive organs. Just ask her, and she can answer. But the way that Christian faith has always addressed this, number one, sound doctrine regarding male and female. In the first century, one of my favorite texts in this, the Corinthians was a place in Corinth that had the homosexuality in lesbians. Paul ends 1 Corinthians by saying, act like men. Be strong. Let all that you do be done in love. Now, there's stereotypes of a man. I get that. But the fact of the matter is there's a certain thing about manliness that men need to cultivate. And let me tell you where this comes in. This is where I'm going to get in trouble as a pastor. A man comes to me, and he's converted. And he's been converted out of a gender dysphoric background. But that needs to change. It communicates something that you don't want to communicate. You want to communicate that you're a man. What does that mean? Well, it's an old topic. If I, as a pastor, now seek to correct that, I am the oppressor. And I am breaking the law. Well, not quite at that point yet, but that's where we're going. So a sound doctrine regarding male and female, it's a massive topic. Number two, medical aspects have to be dealt with by acceptance of the medical and chromosomal data. If you're XX, you're a female. That's how you feel. XY, you're a male. You work in caves, to be sure, but you've got to deal with it like that. That's the biological. That's the medical. At the same time, and I mean, I underline this, lots of biblical counseling when the psychological trumps the biological. In other words, somebody comes and they're fouled up about these things. You get a woman who has been abused by her husband, by her boyfriend, by her boyfriend. And I don't just mean he's had sex with her. He's treated her like an object. And she's attracted to a compassionate woman? Is that wrong? Yes, it is. But in the name of God, try to understand why she's tempted that way, so you can deal with the big issue, okay? So lots of biblical counseling, when the psychological trumps the biological, there is a call to repentance, but it's not equal to a lot of listening. Listen first, and then the call to repentance, and keep in mind, You can understand your LGBTQ neighbors, and you need to understand. It doesn't mean you accept them. I don't know why it is, but if you seek to understand where they're coming from, you're in league with them. No, you're not. You become all things to all people, and by all means, you might save some to the lawless. You understand why they're lawless. You'll be very surprised, incidentally. when I dealt with homosexual men. They'd been abused by other men when they were young. And no, I do not believe the death penalty for the supplies in New Testament. But let me tell you, in my own very male passionate gut, I'd say it's sad that this person's even allowed to live, who's done this to somebody, because it has a destructive power. So lots of biblical counseling when the psychological trumps the biological. And last but not least, I want to unpack this. Don't revert to male and female stereotypes. Everyone has a certain gender identity. And I'll give you some quick examples. Be careful. Don't draw lines where the Bible doesn't. And this is what's happening. A real male, when he's young, will not play with dolls. Well, I'm not sure that that means that the guy's a female. Or a girl. And she's a tomboy. The point is, there's a gravitational pull for the guy who plays with the doll that he goes back to being a man, and the gravitational pull for the girl going back to being a woman. But don't say, no, you can't be a tomboy. Or, if you're a real husband, you're a real leader, don't you dare wash the dishes. That's where we talked with Nan last week. Nan's gotten a whole baptism of what does it mean to submit in the Lord to the government and discipline of this church. If the scriptures don't say it, don't make it your law. Your personal practice, if you want, that's fine. But don't... I don't have a TV. I'm not telling you don't have a TV. I don't like TV. I don't want to waste the money with my TV. And then what happens is people will react to the stereotype, and you've got war on your hands. And how does it work out? Well, that's for another day. Bottom line is, don't let anybody bind your conscience, or the Word of God doesn't. Now, this brings us to the implications for speech and religious practice. And yeah, this is scary, because it's right there We'll deal with that a little bit next week. But I do want you to read the end of Chapter 7, and you'll get kind of a bigger picture of the Yogacara principles. I apologize for one moment. This is really important, folks. You've got to understand what's going on. Yes, Jim? A few quick comments. One is, I've been to Yogya. And I'm doubtful that all that nonsense came from those people. You know, Bali's not too far away. It could have come from there. That's a good point. I wanted to say the same thing, actually. Irony, Jakarta is in where again? It's in Java, which is on the south. It's way south. And then they recently made a law, didn't they? Yeah. of marriage, male and female. So I think we just got a few days. Yeah, also no premarital sex. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So it might be a goss. I'd like to see you try to enforce that. You know, this whole LGBTQ movement has accelerated so quickly, but it couldn't have accelerated without the tearing down of the church and all the morals and Christianity and what it teaches. You have to evolve to be a beast or an animal without any morals so that there is no right or wrong. And the other is, you know, I wondered about the plus sign of the LGBTQ plus, but maybe that's for teen, maybe for adults, because I got two, and I can't figure out which one I want to marry. You have the same problem. The plus refers to all different types of understanding of what gender is. So therefore, in walks a transgender male in the church. And you can see because their hands are bigger, their feet are larger. Their voice is never very high. No matter how much, I mean, the body can be transformed because men can really, I've seen men look like women in their body. But they come in and we know, for all intents and purposes, that this is a man. How do we, if it's possible, approach That's a great question. He or she is made in the image of God. But do you call them Susie? There's where Rosaria Butterfield and I have a difference, and I'm probably wrong. Rosaria says if somebody comes to you, and she was a lesbian, somebody comes to you and he is trans, and will she speak to them as a she? I'm not sure I could go along with that. But the point is, that person's made in the image of God. And there's a sense in which I can say to the person, regardless of what gender you think you are, I treat you as somebody made in God's image. That iris puts you on the right field, because people have various ways of facing God's image. How does he still look back at you? difficulty calling a person by the name they prefer, with kidnapping. But remember, we have to show love. So while loving heartedly, you're going to say, I don't care how you change yourself. You're still whatever you are. I mean, I don't have to know their priorities. I could just say it. I don't know what to say. Virus, I'm not sure that me is where I draw the issue. How about pronouns? Pronouns are a little different. I don't get it. We have to have a whole class. How do we deal with these things? But I always go back to person means. Nan had her hand up, and she's waiting, a true Asian, waiting very patiently to be listened to. We know the homosexuality, transgender, they are caused by people's wrong perception of their own image. We should make it clear it's wrong, but should we use the law to demand them to do things which they So for example, I remember in Near Christianity, C.S. Lewis mentioned he will not persuade believers who want to get divorced to not get divorced because he knows Because they don't know God. And without Lord, they can't be really truly unified as one. So he wouldn't use our rule to impose that on unbelievers. Because they cannot make it without God. So the same thing. It is wrong. But they cannot change how they think about themselves God's help. And now they don't know God. But should we use law to demand them to do things they cannot even do? Like we are accepting law right now, allowing people to have divorce. It is not right. But because they don't know God, they are not believers. So we've allowed it. Same thing for the transgender homosexuality. It's wrong, but they can't do it, that means they are dying. I think that it kind of goes into the argument of can we legislate more like morality? And the idea that we have traffic lights up, right? We say people can't you know, obey laws, but yet we expect them to follow traffic signs and traffic lights and things of that nature. So we have an obligation to legislate things that will protect society and protect us from harm and protect ourselves and one another from injury. And that's... Yeah, the answer is yes. Government... Here's the distinction, man. Government is to make law to restrain people from doing things that would be destructive to others. That's why you have laws against killing, that's why you have laws against stealing. Basically, you're going to at least the last of the Ten Commandments, there's to be respect for authority. That first four, I still think government needs to be involved with that, that's a whole other story. So government is to restrain what's wrong, and it can do that. It has the power of the sword, for example, to restrain. A simple way to do it. You've got someone who's a murderer. They shouldn't murder. If they murdered, and you can prove that there's murder, then the death penalty is to be applied. It stops them from doing it. That's the extreme case. It's also a deterrent to people tempted to do that. Right. It's a deterrent, exactly, and which restrains. The law, though, in the end, can't constrain. Paul says that in Romans 7. Frankly, the law makes you believe. As soon as you tell a child, don't you put your hand in that cookie jar. That's what they want to do all day long, right? OK. constraints. And that's what we pray for, and that's what we work for. It's really the work of the church, so that people's hearts want to do what's right and wrong. But no, the government's got to legislate morality. Then the big issue is what's morality. Here's the big dilemma. How does the church protect itself? But what's going to happen, and it's going to happen, that if a couple walks in here and wants to get married, and the pastor says, I'm sorry, we can't condone that, guess what? We're going to be in trouble, or we're going to lose our tax-exempt status, because they're already talking about it, taking away the tax-exempt status of that church, if we don't conform. In Houston, we had that mayor that wanted to review pastors' messages. There's one of the many things that I appreciate about the Westminster Standards. It's the only one of Protestant or of Reformed doctrinal standards that has a statement about marriage and divorce. And as a church, we are recognized as believing marriage between one man and one woman. And that does give a certain protection, legal protection. That's not the first thing I'm looking for, but we have that. And I thank God for that statement of the confession. Well, Cliffs of the Rock, we had that in our statement of faith. And we would be instructed to put that in there, because it's for that reason. But you could still be faced with a transgender male, and a lesbian female, and that, in their mind, the law says, we're not a man. and you're a woman, and they want to get married in a Christian church. Even though the standards say man and female, if the law recognizes that that man who became a woman is now a woman by law, then you're dealing with a man and a woman. Look, we're in trouble. We have a Supreme Court justice who can't That is a really good point. I had not thought about that. But let me tackle it a bit and then we do need to get to the food info. Mike and Denise, I'm sure you provided some wonderful food for us. Really, that's a great question, Joe. Let me answer it in a few ways. Number one, you better be sure as a pastor that you are speaking what the Word of God says to someone. Which, you know, again, to your question is a good one. How do I regard this man who is transed into a woman, when I determine things by biology, I think that's what it would be, but you've got to be sure that you're accurately interpreting the Word of God, which means that churches are going to have to start working In Egypt, there are Presbyterians, there are Baptists, there are Methodists, among the Protestants, most are Presbyterians because they evangelized Egypt. They worked together in something called Synod of the Nile. where when you have a government breathing down their necks, not only because it's led by Muslims, but they want Egypt to be a model of an Islamic state, they must work together or they're going to get devoured. And I hope to God I see something like that in this country, where Bible-believing Christians are fragmented in the areas where they really shouldn't be. So that's the first thing. What does the word of God say? There's going to be a lot of areas where I'm not really sure what that is. I'm glad I've got a present theory. I'm glad I've got a general assembly. I'm glad I've got NAEPAR. But we're going to have to be working more closely with one another. So that's number one. Number two, once you've decided what the word of God says, and you're not a lone ranger in this thing, if you have to say no, you say no. You must do that. And there, thank God, we do have the Christian Legal Defense Society. We have the Thomas Moore Society that we work with so we can get worship restored in the prisons. Thank God we still have those things. And thank God that, at least as I'm seeing things right now, in the Supreme Court I'm not sure of, but at least on local and at largely because this is not a pro-Donald Trump statement. In fact, Donald Trump did appoint many, many justices who believe that if you don't make the law, you interpret it. So at least at this point, there is a certain amount of protection in the courts. At the end of the day, if you have to lose your tax exemption, you've got to go to jail. You give up your tax exemption, and you go to jail. I don't think that will happen, incidentally, at least not in our lifetimes. because you have a lot, I won't mention groups, but you have a lot of groups that get a lot of money from that tax exemption, and they are very, very vocal. You go ahead and try to take that away, and I don't care whether you're liberal or conservative, you're gonna have convictions. That doesn't make me happy, but, so I think, Joe, that would be kind of my big, big piece of the answer. You look quizzical. No, no, no, no. I don't disagree with that. It's a challenge, I know. Because it goes far beyond, you're talking about the charitable work or the faith-based work that's done in the name of Christ would go away. Who's going to give to it? You know what I'm saying? Oh, no, look, I agree. I know, I know. You say no, and you go to jail. I mean, that's where... I have a lawyer to run for the cross. I just hope like other jail folks who visit me. Believe me, I used to say, Joe, there'll be persecution. I won't see it in my day. I don't say that anymore. I mean, not with the rapidity with which things are going right now. Thank you, Michael, for the food. Where's Denise? She's back there. Hey, Denise. All righty, let's stand. Jim, why don't you lead us in prayer and ask for a blessing on the food. Lord, thank you for gathering us today to worship you. Thank you for the prayers and the sayings. Thank you for the many answers to prayer. Thank you. for the food that we are going to enjoy with one another, and having blessed us. And thank you for the insight that we have on this strange new world that we live in, and we'll raise our children to enjoy, protect them, and watch over us. In Jesus' name, we pray. Amen.