Andy Stanley, pastor of the Atlanta-area megachurch, North Point Community Church, on Sunday addressed the controversy surrounding a conference last weekend at North Point, billed as the “premier event . . . to support parents and LGBTQ+ children in their churches.” The sermon was not livestreamed, but The Roys Report has obtained audio of both the 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. services, which we’ve published below.
The sermon was a response to allegations from prominent Southern Baptist seminary president Al Mohler that the conference, featuring gay-affirming speakers, signified Stanley’s departure from biblical Christianity. However, Stanley claimed in the sermon that he “never subscribed to (Mohler’s) version of biblical Christianity,” which Stanley typified as drawing “lines”:
(Mohler’s) version, this version of Biblical Christianity is why people are leaving Christianity unnecessarily. It’s the version is the version that causes people to resist the Christian faith, because they can’t find Jesus in the midst of all the other stuff and all the other theology and all the other complexity that gets glommed on to the message bottom line, that version of Christianity, draws lines. And Jesus drew circles. He drew circles so large and included so many people in his circle, that it consistently made religious leaders nervous.
Stanley affirmed that “biblical marriage is between a man and a woman.” But he also stated that many gay people “are convinced that traditional marriage is not an option for them.” He said some commit “to living a chaste life.” But “for many, that is not sustainable, so they choose same-sex marriage—not because they’re convinced it’s biblical . . . They choose to marry for the same reason many of us do: love, companionship.”
Stanley said the decision of same-sex couples to marry is “their decision. Our decision, as a group of local churches, is how are we going to respond to their decisions.” Stanley said Northpoint has taken the position that it will welcome people “regardless of their starting point, regardless of their past, regardless of their current circumstances, our message is come and see and come sit with me.”
Mohler has not yet responded to Stanley’s sermon. However, Denny Burk, president of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, wrote in a post published yesterday that Stanley’s sermon was “subversively anti-Christian.”
Your tax-deductible gift helps our journalists report the truth and hold Christian leaders and organizations accountable. Give a gift of $30 or more to The Roys Report this month, and you will receive a copy of “Baptistland: A Memoir of Abuse, Betrayal, and Transformation” by Christa Brown. To donate, click here.
“The message is anti-Christian because it tells unrepentant sinners that they can inherit the kingdom of God—a message that the Bible roundly contradicts,” Burk wrote.
However, Stanley’s message seemed well received by his congregation. One person wrote on Twitter, “I was there. He did great.” Another wrote, “So thankful for @AndyStanley and his courage and faithfulness. He is actively helping people see the goodness of God knowing the criticism he would face. If your God treats people like trash until they repent, you are not following Jesus.”
Full story with more reaction from both sides is coming.
Northpoint Church’s 9 a.m. Service on Oct. 1:
Northpoint Church’s 11 a.m. Service on Oct. 1:
Julie Roys is a veteran investigative reporter and founder of The Roys Report. She also previously hosted a national talk show on the Moody Radio Network, called Up for Debate, and has worked as a TV reporter for a CBS affiliate. Her articles have appeared in numerous periodicals. 
English 
Spanish 
111 Responses
If there is a phrase that needs to vanish, it is biblical marriage. Marriage in the Bible is a diverse thing. It is honestly defined as one man and one woman, one man and many women, one man and an enslaved woman, one Jewish man and one Jewish woman (no foreign wives), one man who lies that his wife is his sister and gives her to some other dude to be raped by, and on and on. Then we of course learn of singleness as a valid way of life, households led by influential women, the blessing and affirmation of eunuchs (closest reference to trans or a third gender), and Roman households that could include slaves and extended families. Since the Biblical witness, marriage has changed immensely through laws, cultural differences, and more. It’s always changed. And it will change more. At least Andy Stanley is being honest that the starting point from a Christ-like way is love – getting to know people and relating to them first before deciding one is a god over their lives. How many times did Jesus eat with those who were called sinners? Such an act was love and an affirmation of their imprinted divine image. Such was the gospel.
Thanks for your reporting, Julie Roy’s.
Nathan –
Thank you for your reply. It is one that gives me a lot to reflect on, as I had a friend (who is in ministry) share with me that he and his wife believe it is best for them to explore polyamory. I reacted instead of responded – and that reaction was one of harsh rebuke. Yet my friend was raising several of the points you are; I just wasn’t in a place to hear them. I am disappointed I reacted that way, because I have been turned off by many messages and ministries as an “older” single. I should have led with empathy.
We as the body of Christ need to have open conversations on these topics, with the ultimate goal of loving one another and pointing them to the gospel. Even in scripture, not all families looked the same, not all prophets were raised in or leading “two parent households between one man and one wife”, and both singles and women were faithfully spreading the gospel.
Beautiful reflection. Yes, I am grateful as I read the saints and so many people of faith that scripture doesn’t answer all of our questions. We have to struggle and wrestle and listen. Sometimes, we (the church) have gotten it wrong. But we can also get it right. Continue to learn and discern.
Marin,
The conversations have been had. Sin is Sin is Sin. The ultimate goal should be bringing people to Christ so they can experience His power when it comes to overcoming the sins in their life. This conversation has been about sin from the start, not about what individual families might look like.
Further, if the truth offends people, so be it. It does no one any good to “discuss” and have “open conversations” about sinful behavior unless people don’t know it’s sin. If they do, and continue while claiming to be Christians, the Bible makes clear we are to have nothing to do with them.
James 4:17
“Remember, it is sin to know what you ought to do and then not do it.”
Hi Marin,
While kindness and gentleness should characterize Christians words and behaviors, I don’t think you’re initial response to your friend was entirely wrong.
Don’t be lead astray by the voice of the serpent here, trying to bring confusion by asking “Did God really say…?” or saying “You surely won’t die.” Your friend is entertaining dangerous ideas and it’s loving to say so.
For just one good example of the danger your friend is entertaining, read Hebrews 13:4.
Peace.
In at least the United States, and perhaps the entire western world, marriage seems to be defined as the purchase of a license issued by the government of that particular geographic area. Possession of said license entitles the license holders to “benefits” such as filing tax returns jointly and being a dependent on the other license holder’s employer sponsored health insurance.
It appears to me that in our modern society, many Christians equate biblical marriage to limiting who can and can’t purchase said government issued license. Perhaps marriage and singleness is something completely different than who holds or doesn’t hold a government issued license. I’m pretty sure that the folks described in the Bible as entering into marriage covenants didn’t have to go down to the courthouse to buy a marriage license.
Hi Amy, what wonderful questions to ask. Indeed, the idea of marriage as a legal reality adds a whole layer to unpack. It wasn’t too long ago that a Hebrew bible professor shared that the Hebrew word for marriage doesn’t show up all that often in the Old Testament. That is super fascinating! I can’t say what it means for me yet, but it does keep me asking questions and trying to understand fully some scriptures that get used to bludgeon and wound people. You are a blessing!
I would suggest that we be careful pointing to relationships and the actions of some men as prescriptive when it is only descriptive. Context also is important to continue to have the use of both our hands and both our eyes.
Nice reply Ian. Short and concise . God only created one wife for Adam not two.
Unfortunately, Adam and Eve are not names – but can also be translated as first man or woman. I think we stretch the text too far when we read such nonsense into it. It’s a mythic story of the beginnings that speaks to God’s goodness and the invitation to be co-creators with God, not a designation of marriage or the complexity of human relationships for all eternity. If it was the latter, within two chapters, men have multiple wives – without any reproach from God. Let’s read the Bible, rather than force it to fit our very narrow perspectives.
In response to the claim of Adam and Eve not being names and the story of the beginnings being mythic, keep in mind a couple of things. First, included in various genealogies of people mentioned by name in the first eight chapters of 1 Chronicles is a genealogy in 1 Chronicles 1:1-4 that begins with Adam, something that wouldn’t have been mentioned if Adam wasn’t a real person back at the beginnings. Second, in Luke 3:23-38, a genealogy of Jesus is given going backwards that goes all the way back to Adam (Luke 3:38), something that wouldn’t have been mentioned if Adam wasn’t a real person back at the beginnings.
“It’s a mythic story of the beginnings that speaks to God’s goodness and the invitation to be co-creators with God, not a designation of marriage or the complexity of human relationships for all eternity.”
Says who and based on what authority?
When most Christians refer to “biblical marriage” in the context of this discussion, they are thinking of the New Testament definition, which draws on Genesis 2. That’s what Jesus did in Matthew 19 in his correction of the Pharisees’ attempt to muddy the water with sub-biblical exceptions. Jesus would have none of that. The NT, following Jesus’ answer, is clear that biblical marriage is one man and one woman in monogamous union. So I don’t think Jesus would want “that phrase to vanish.” He articulated it, since He was the Creator of marriage in the first place.
But that’s not accurate, Chris. Matthew 19 is about divorce. It’s not a sermon about the establishment of marriage. Or the institution. Or how the government should issue marriage licenses and provide legal protections for folks who are committed to care for each other and show up in the hospital when their partner needs emergency care. Let’s just be honest. That’s a beautiful place to begin a life-giving discussion.
Not accurate??? You suggest we should “just be honest” but you’re not being honest with Matthew 19. Sure, the Pharisees asked about divorce, but Jesus certainly spoke directly about the establishment of marriage in His answer. In fact, the establishment of marrage by God in Genesis 2 is precisely THE basis and foundation of His answer to the Pharisees, and Jesus clearly defines marriage here as God the Father did in the beginning: one man and one woman becoming one flesh. It’s that simple.
The context is about divorce. Jesus is harsh about divorce. I will agree on that. He has high standards. I just read what is in scripture – you add more to it. Maybe we should leave it at that.
I do think Jesus was responding to ethical issues in his community. Our community is different than what Jesus experienced. He gave us tools to respond compassionately in whatever reality we live in. Let’s apply them.
Mykel:
Very few Churches and Christians have much to say about divorce today? What changed?
You’re mistaken. The question the Pharisees asked was about divorce, but Jesus answer was absolutely about the establishment and institution of marriage. His understanding of divorce was rooted in his understanding of the nature the establishment and institution of marriage. Denying that reveals that you misunderstand the passage.
“Let’s just be honest. That’s a beautiful place to begin a life-giving discussion.”
This isn’t honesty, it’s nothing but sentimentality.
Excuses, excuses, excuses. The people Nathan Hill is referring to in the Bible were ALSO people who loved their immoral sin! Andy Stanley is making More excuses for those that love sin and hate God. Nathan Hill, Any Stanley, and the likes of them are blasphemers.
Oh, so the Bible doesn’t matter now? Your personal morality does? Cool. But then let’s not call it “biblical”. Right?
If pointing out, with deep honesty, that the Bible has many definitions of marriage makes us blasphemers, wow.
This is a misunderstanding and misrepresentation of what the term “biblical marriage” means. Biblical marriage is a reference to the creation ordinance found in Genesis chapters 1:27-28, and Genesis 2:23-25. These passages are normative, as Jesus also understood when he quoted them in Matthew 19: 4-6.
Just because other forms of marriage are seen in the biblical narratives, that does not mean they are normative, any more than a mystery novel featuring a murder in it’s plot means the author sees murder as normative. Everything besides the normative pattern is the result of living in a fallen world, including polyamory and homosexuality. God may have permitted or allowed polygamy in the past but Jesus reaffirmed the normative pattern, as did the early church.
Thank you for posting this. Another wolf in the pulpit. At least we have his dad’s legacy of fidelity to God’s unchanging Word.
I really don’t think Jesus is going be asking you to make that assessment of another. That’s His job.
How would we then know what a wolf is, especially since according to the words of Jesus, we are to watch out for them?
Matthew 7-
15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
Some fruitful ministry is happening among the LGBTQ+ community. While there are those who want to hold up signs and shout condemnations to no effect (other than to keep people away from faith or the church) at Pride events, there are those who are forming beautiful relationships, learning and walking alongside beautiful children of God. That is fruit that is transforming. The other side goes away empty-handed. Hmmm. How do we measure that fruit?
Nathan, this is an honest question. Does this fruitful ministry you mention that’s happening among the LGBTQ+ community involve preaching both the need for repentance from sin (including homosexual behavior) and belief in the Gospel as Jesus preached (Mark 1:14-15), or is it a false Gospel that allows them to continue in sin while professing to know Christ? The fruit of the Gospel is transformation and conversion, not merely “forming beautiful relationships, learning and walking alongside” those who are slaves to an LGBTQ lifestyle. My 21 year old daughter is surrounded by those who are caught in this lifestyle and has developed many close friendships with them, but she loves them enough to tell them the truth that unless they repent they cannot enter the kingdom of God. Amazingly enough, many respect her for that and see through the hypocrisy of those Christians who don’t.
Nathan,
Who are these “children of God” you mention?
“‘The message is anti-Christian because it tells unrepentant sinners that they can inherit the kingdom of God—a message that the Bible roundly contradicts,’ Burke wrote.”
I guess George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards and any other number of slaveholding theologians were not saved, then.
And yes I predict this is where that line of reasoning will go between those like Stanley who preach a love-first approach and those like Burke who preach a repentance-first approach (selectively, in my view). And ultimately Burke’s ilk will end up downplaying slavery because they are so myopically focused on issues of gender and sexuality.
But there is always Doug Wilson’s writings to comfort Burke and tell him that really slavery wasn’t as sinful as Andy Stanley’s middle ground view here.
slavery and same sex marriage are both sins! Whitefield, Edward’s, and stanley are all wrong based on thr bible!
That would mean Burk does not believe the SBC, or Southern Baptist Seminary, were founded by Christians. Strange heritage he’s part of, since he teaches at Boyce College and got his PhD from Southern.
“For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 2 Timothy 4:3-4
We must have truly entered that time. There is a huge difference in what occurred, what God allowed, and what God desires and forbids.
Corrupt desires, or weariness of condemning those desires shouldn’t drive the bus. Even if everybody else agrees, we, as Christians, should defend God’s word. We don’t get to rewrite it.
Aligning others to God “is love.” Ask anyone facing the consequences of a wayward life if they are still having fun.
Sin is pleasurable “for a season.” God is not the “fun police.” His definition of fun, however, does not lead to regret.
I would love to tell a gay couple, who committed to each other for 30+ years even before it was legal, that their sin is “for a season” and meanwhile the heterosexual couple, like say former Pres. Trump, get divorced on a whim, I guess, is good.
I’d encourage you to rethink your perspective. Jesus’ command to look at the log in your own eye means, for us who are heterosexual, our first focus and critique should always be against ourselves way before anyone else.
Of course, I have always interpreted Jesus’ teachings that we anytime we are convinced that we are better or less a sinner than someone else… we are off track already. It’s not a leaderbord. No one gets to the playoffs by being better than your neighbor.
“My” perspective isn’t the issue. An attempt to “correct” or “update” God’s word to fit a perspective contrary to His word – is the issue.
Thinking you’re ok because you think you’re less sinful than another is silly. Assuring others they are right with God when they are in clear violation – is damning.
We all suppress our sinful inclinations to an extent or we’d all be in prison. Live how “you” will or seek to live how “God” wills. Just don’t say they are one and the same when and where they are not.
Nathan, excellent points. I agree with you and appreciate your perspective. I dont understand the so called Christian urge to always cast stones. Why be so quick to judge others. Why can’t we just love the Lord with all our hearts and our neighbor as ourselves? Then I doubt any of this would be an issue. We wouldn’t need conferences on how to love people who aren’t like us, loving & supporting families who have children who aren’t like us, and churches and so called Christians wouldn’t be known as people who hate and treat gay people badly. It’s so sad to me. People are leaving the church because it’s unloving. They are sinners. We are all sinners with a sin nature, made this way by our loving creator God. He gets us. Yes, we are called to repentance but how do you, oh pharisees, know that God is not working in others, changing hearts and lives, all while you are throwing stones? Its HIS job, not yours. You have a log in your eye. You may not even know Jesus. I wish I could find a loving church community like the Mennonite community or the Red Letter Christians community but I’ve not found such a group in the south so far. Still looking…may God have mercy.
Wilma,
Your words:
“We are all sinners with a sin nature, made this way by our loving creator God.”
God did not create sinners. We chose to be sinners. There is a very serious difference. When God created the world, he created something he called “good.” We used to walk around with him before sin entered the world.
Please don’t blame God for our sin nature. That’s wrong on every level.
Hi Debra, you are correct about heterosexual adulterous sin. However, ALL homosexual sex is defined as sin by GOD, because it a perversion of HIS natural use of the human body. GOD defined that natural use with HIS command to be fruitful and multiply, which cannot be accomplished through homosexual sex. Paul also made it clear that ALL adulterous sex is a sin in 1 Corinthians 6:19. Once we are in the BODY OF LORD JESUS, our human bodies are the dwelling place of the HOLY SPIRIT. If we pervert the dwelling place, the HOLY SPIRIT does not reside. Likewise, when we engage in fruitless sex, whose will are we following? A celibate homosexual can be in the BODY OF LORD JESUS. However, if we truly love another person we will tell them the truth, instead of reaffirming sinful behavior. Andy wants people to like him, so he affirms their lifestyles. LORD JESUS told us HE came to divide and always told us to “go and sin no more.” IS Andy doing that?
You CLEARLY have my comments confused with another!!!!!
Eric,
I agree with everything you’ve said. You have “erroneously” attributed someone else’s comments to me.
““The message is anti-Christian because it tells unrepentant sinners that they can inherit the kingdom of God—a message that the Bible roundly contradicts,” Burk wrote.”
I’m grateful to both Andy Stanley and Burk, for this phrasing arising from their fundamental disagreement. Grateful because it drives understanding and discussion back to the basic ground. Namely what do we mean by the “kingdom of God”.
I don’t then much like the monarchical terms we here inherit from the Bible. I suspect that while these terms do reflect cultural understanding at the time of the Bible’s authoring, I think it likely that the original terms have been tweaked and tweaked again by the numerous societal regimes which have laid hold on the Bible as the basis for state religions.
I think we might benefit from thinking more in terms of fruits of being, mediated (re-mediated) humanity that comes about from committing to the Bible’s core thesis of God and Jesus. So what is it for an authentic committed Christian to “inherit the kingdom of God”. But let’s start from where we find ourselves now. Let’s approach the reality referred to, in terms of who and what we find ourselves to be now. Let’s discuss this thing anew, in the terms of now. I suspect that is where Andy Stanley is at.
Burk’s testimony as to Christianity simply engenders resistance in me. While Andy Stanley’s testimony has me listening and striving to understand.
So, are you saying the law, which defines sin, “engenders” resistance within you? But the option that allows for sin, interest you?
That, my friend, is the sticking point. The law reveals what is or isn’t acceptable.
You can not say you didn’t know you were speeding when the speed limit is clearly posted.
You can “discuss your opinion of the law” with an officer or judge all you’d like, but it will not change the fact that if you exceeded that limit, you were in violation of the law.
Big difference is man’s laws can change. God’s do not.
Debra, I respect the understanding of the Bible and God, which you express in your testimony. That understanding informs your belief and faith, and will mediate your being thereby. Things in the round then to be adjudged by the fruits of your belief and faith; namely what quality of being and person is thereby mediated.
However, there is then one small point, namely that we disagree comprehensively in our understanding of the Bible and God.
While the ultimate truth of God (and thereby of the Bible) may be unchanging, human understanding of God and Bible do not equate to that truth, and have changed ceaselessly since the beginning of human concern with gods and God.
We probably disagree about what you call “law”. From my point of view individual belief and faith are what is crucial. It seems to me that Jesus exemplifies this truth, as he revisited, reviewed, questioned and challenged what Jewish orthodoxy saw as “law”.
My sense is that we are alone in our relation to God. What we win to in that relation, is what the Bible terms “spirit”. It seems to me that “law” and spirit are chalk and cheese different.
You’re trying to get to an event that is already over. God has spoken and He didn’t stutter.
Be very careful twisting God’s word to fit your agenda. He doesn’t like being “misquoted.”
Debra. With respect for your understanding, belief and faith. No individual, neither you nor I, can speak for God. You have derived understanding of God from your reading of the Bible. Likewise have I, and every other Christian. That my reading-derived understanding differs from your reading-derived understanding, cannot be reduced to me or you twisting or misquoting “God’s word”.
Colin,
Context. You cannot take a passage here and there without understanding the totality of God’s word, His nature, His attributes. Nor can you claim people are “unloving,” “throwing stones,” “being judgmental” etc… because we adhere to Scripture.
You don’t get to claim everyone has a right to “their truth,” any more than you can change mathematical certainties. Somewhere along the way, “you” miscalculated if your conclusion is incorrect.
I would also ask, what is the definition of love? It “rejoices with the truth.” People forget the part.
Yes, God has indeed spoken about misrepresenting His word. Any and all thinking they are on the high ground by trying to paint mature Christians as unloving, should “put away childish things.” Admonishment is loving. What loving parent allows their child to engage in reckless behavior?
“ALL” Christians “work” to overcome our sinful bents. We don’t ask for a pass.
Debra. You ask (rhetorically), “I would also ask, what is the definition of love? It “rejoices with the truth.” People forget the part.”
Truth is the holy grail of much human endeavour. Truth is the curse of human occurrence. In the name of differing truths humans disadvantage and murder one another. Truth is glorious when experienced. Truth is dangerous.
Love can become perverse. However, in its favour it tends to be less brutal than truth. Ultimately love is safer than truth. Love can be ingrained in our biology. The love that many families sustain, is commendable and inspiring.
However, truth and love, in combination, can have a complex relation. Arguably none moreso that the Christian notion of hating the sin and (nominally) loving the sinner.
Ultimately, both love and truth are crucially subjective. The mistake we humans make, is when we elevate our sense of truth beyond it being subjective. Here Christians are tested as to the strength of their love for one another. Some choose to love in the face of truth disagreement. Some tend to favour their sense of truth.
While living in Buckhead and attending Buckhead Church, I personally heard Andy condemn the use of, “the Bible says,” in determining truth or in convincing anyone else what is true. Yet, the only basis for determining truth is to ascertain what, “the Bible says,” for our behaviors and direction.
I no longer pay attention to the confused messages coming from Andy or attend his wonderfully people-packed churches. There are many competing interpretations of what “the Bible says,” that can be sincerely held across a broad spectrum of true believers, but to minimize “what the Bible says,” and replace its authority with anything that I want to alternatively be true, is dangerous deflection – akin to, but even exceeding the terrible harm of, deflection in the areas of excusing racist acts or attitudes or sexual sins by church leaders or others claiming to personally know and represent Jesus.
I am fairly confident that Andy would dismiss my thoughts with just a shrug and a comment something like, “He just doesn’t GET me and my ministry.” Regardless, we are currently heading in different directions. I hope and pray that will not be the case at the point(s) that we respectively step into eternity.
David, we have the Bible (a much tweaked source over its lifetime), those who read the Bible, and those who rely on their reading of the Bible.
I sense that Andy would not be averse to the idea that, rather than saying that “the Bible says”, we might say “this is the understanding that reading the Bible left me with”. Where Andy might argue that no understanding of the Bible that exists or has exists, has been able to skip this crucial moment of human beings reading the Bible, or relying on others who have read the Bible.
In fact and truth, reading the Bible is a democratic activity. This the moreso within the Protestant tradition. It seems to me that what Andy seeks to bring about is a Church setting which lends itself to many coming to read the Bible. After which the spiritual chips will fall where they may.
Andy is in fact maximising the Bible. Maximising its Protestant reading. Maximising reliance on what reading of it can yield. Don’t prematurely give up on the communion that can result.
David, the Bible is our guide but it has so much in there that we cannot possibly understand so it’s definitely up for interpretation. Like Lot offering his virgin daughters to the mob, God speaking through the donkey, showing Moses magic tricks with turning the rod into a snake, God decides to kill Moses bc his son wasn’t circumcised, God saying he will send plagues so you will know Him (Ex 9:14) And the Lord repented of the evil He thought of doing to his people (Ex 34:14), if you sin without knowing it, kill an unblemished ram (Lev 5:14-15) How do you know if you dont know? And you cant go to church if your testicles are damaged (Deut 23:1), God smites the people of Ashdod with hemorrhoids (Sam 5:6-12) and on and on, like all the things Nathan brought up about “biblical marriage ” in the first paragraph with all the many wives and concubines. How can we possibly understand some of this Biblical stuff? How does one preach on all this? We’re going to get some things wrong but I’d rather err on the side of loving my neighbor. Just living people where they are. We can only do our best, asking God for wisdom and this is why I’d say first and foremost, our job must be to Love God then love our neighbor as ourselves because this is something we can all understand and should be able to do.
Jason:
Are their any other “sins” besides these 2. Fundamentalist love to make a Capital offense of others “sins.”
yes, there are many other sins. but those were the ones addressed. Andy confuses the whole issue by having a gay “married” couple speak at his church.. sheesh!!!! of course, them he says marriage is between a man and a woman! good job of confusion, Andy!!!
Rosaria Butterfield brings brilliant Biblical clarity to this issue in a recent interview by Eric Metaxas:
https://youtu.be/h0GIoWC0xQU?si=Ti7V6OtfevK0c2Ly
Andy Stanley is not teaching the whole counsel of God.
To the moderators of this debate: I doubt you will print this reply, but I’ll give it anyway. You’ve affectively censored my participation in this forum over the past 3 to 4 months. Every comment I make, even though it is not personally critical or harsh, has been censored. Yet, you allow Nathan Hill to tell people to grow up. I’m not sure how allowing him to use language like that, which would appear to violate your standards, is moderating this forum with balance, except if you agree with Mr. Hill. That’s all I have to say.
Your previous comments did not include a last name. We do not publish comments without full names.
Eric “Jesus was white” Metaxas? No thanks.
Marin, AGREED. I used to be a Metaxas fan for a short time back in the Chuck Colson Breakpoint days but whew!! “Jesus was white” seriously? So delirious. Then over the years, I’m like I must flee from listening to this ill-informed and angry mobster. Just my opinion.
Jason, can we not learn from the gay married couple? Really? Good grief, we certainly can and should! The most demonized person in the US today is someone who thinks or says they might be gay! We figuratively stone them every day! Christians do that. Christians, people who say they embrace the Lord Jesus Christ, they demonize and cause continuous hardship and pain to anyone who fits in that category and their families, treating them as lepers; not loving them as Christ would do. Gay people will make so called Christians, better Christ followers. Just like hanging with homeless people makes us better Christ followers. Community with people that are not like you, make you a better Christ follower and help you throw less stones. We are all sinners. We seem to forget that in our “cut them out of your life if they sin” rhetoric. It’s not like Jesus. He went where the prostitutes hung. We all have logs in our eyes and we are so quick to judge others without seeing our own sinful nature.
Wilma,
What can we learn from a gay couple? How to love others, make a relationship work, how to suffer? All in the Bible. They didn’t invent relationship wisdom or life skills. God did.
What can we learn from the homeless? Don’t work, don’t eat. Take your medication. Stay off drugs. People will stop giving you money if you’re irresponsible. If you go to a shelter, they have rules too. All principles in the Bible. All came from God, not from the homeless.
There are things that belong only to God, but some of the things you mentioned, we do know. There is the law, and grace. Old Testament, New Testament. Some things apply to Israel. We have seminaries, Bible colleges, Christian schools to fill in some of the blanks. Greek, Hebrew, customs, etc… If, since, God created the world, a talking donkey shouldn’t be impossible to believe. It is a gift of “faith.”
When is National Prostitutes Day? Drunkard Day? Adulterer Day? Theft Day? So on… People are usually ashamed of their sins. They try to keep them hidden or private.
No doubt, we have, or do, all love a homosexual person. The issue is an attempt to change what the Bible says about homosexuality. I hope every Christian agrees, they don’t get to do that.
Why do they want to? They can just reject Christianity like many heterosexuals.
Wilma, the “most demonized” person(s) in the United States today are those who have been transformed from gender self-identification to a new identity in Christ alone, born again of the Spirit. Rosaria Butterfield for one.
“For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Galations 3:27-28 ESV
As usual Julie Roys is on the LGBTQ+ side of the “debate”.
No. Where in this article did I take a side?
Julie
– so much argument about “biblical” influenced by the culture of the day and by one’s political persuasion – Such as liberal/progressive versus traditional/conservative.
Is not the only thing – Jesus, “Who do you say that I am?” Is one a believer in Jesus as the Son of God? The One Who died for one’s sins? The One Whom I believe in, the One Who died for my sins, and I now have eternal life!
The point is that there are far worse evils than the “LGBTQ+” people. There are people harming children and abusing those in their care. And you want to get upset about people who are made by God to love differently than you? Grow up.
Hi, Nathan. I listened to the sermon that Andy Stanley gave, as clipped in Julie’s report. In it Andy spoke about how NorthPoint still affirms marriage in Scripture as between one-man, one-woman, and yet decided to sponsor the Embracing the Journey conference, even though two of the speakers disagree with the church’s doctrinal stance. Andy tried to make a distinction between a theological versus pastoral conference, in which Embracing the Journey was the latter. I can understand why it is confusing to try to delineate the difference between platforming a message versus simply “having a conversation,” which the latter seemed to be Andy’s vision for the conference. I am curious as to what you think about all of that?
Nathan:
Romans 3:23
“For ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”
God’s design for our wellbeing has often been thwarted. That’s because we are sinners and because we like doing our own thing our own way.
That does not mean God is not Holy and that he abhors ALL sin in any form. It’s the whole reason Jesus came. And, keep in mind, just because God loves us does not mean he loves our behavior. So, I believe that you are the one who needs to grow up when it comes to SIN.
God does not make people to watch them live in sin. He makes people long for Him and come to Him because of Jesus’s sacrifice. Perhaps a refresher course in the consequences of sin would help you out?
Where did Julie Roys take a side in this debate, in this article or elsewhere?
she did not take a side
Julie, always a #1 stand out Journalist! Love it and Love you for bringing issues to us that we need to consider. I was a huge fan of UP FOR DEBATE and miss it so much!! And I have more time to listen than I do to read but always grateful for the articles you bring to us. And no, you did not in any way, take a side. Excellence as always! Thank you.
Attitudes in our culture towards ‘gays’ (Those within the LGBTQ community) have changed dramatically over the years. In the past most were viewed as perverts. pedophiles and psychologically unstable and engaged in dangerous behavior.
Now many see them as part of the mainstream.
Hence the problem for the church.
Big problem for the church. Hard to admit you may have gotten it wrong. Witness the continued waffling on slavery and the legacy of the church’s historic racism.
No. If the church is governed by the Word of God , there is no problem.
Was it “no problem” when many churches could quote scriptures that support and regulate slavery rather than condemning it as justification for the righteousness of slave ownership? For those who, like you seem to, believe that what scripture says is crystal clear, how can you not support slavery when, for example, we read in Leviticus 25:44–46 that it’s fine to take slaves from other nations, and treat them as property that can be passed on to their children, or in Ephesians 6:5, we read that slaves should always obey their masters, and compares slave masters to Christ himself. Based on your statement, a church “governed by the Word of God” should be preaching and advocating in favor of slavery, as well as capital punishment for gay people. The vast majority of people with a high view of scripture don’t preach those things because they, in fact know that those scriptures were wrong, and cannot and should not be adhered to today. Of course they do this while, all the while, preaching that scripture is inerrant. At least people like Stanley are honest about being selective in their interpretation of scripture.
Tom Getchell-Lacey:
Your words:
“For those who, like you seem to, believe that what scripture says is crystal clear, how can you not support slavery when, for example, we read in Leviticus 25:44–46 that it’s fine to take slaves from other nations, and treat them as property that can be passed on to their children, or in Ephesians 6:5, we read that slaves should always obey their masters, and compares slave masters to Christ himself. ”
Two points:
1) CONTEXT. Slaves back in Bible times/Roman times/Greek times did not look/act/get treated anything like Black slaves in the South. Totally different time, totally different context, totally different phenomenon.
2) The Bible needs to be looked at as the Word of God. His character is revealed, particularly in the death of his own son as a consequence of our sins. Do you think a God like that would condone enslaving people, when he sent Jesus to set us free from sin?
NO CHANCE. If you wish to interpret the Bible correctly, you have to take its message as a whole and you have to look at context. That people in the South twisted scripture to fit their sin is similar to what others living a homosexual life are trying to do today.
It doesn’t work and it’s wrong.
Thank you for posting this, Julie. Appreciate all you do.
For Andy Stanley to platform openly gay , practicing homosexuals in a Christian church says it all. It is apostate in character.
What if instead of homosexuality and same-sex marriage as the issue (both legal but immoral), the matter was substituted w/a Christian’s choice of racism and Klan membership (also both legal but immoral). Being a Christian and being a disciple are two different things. There are immoral and imperfect Christians (just look at me), but to “follow Jesus” – being a disciple – requires obedience. Eternal security and a right relationship w/God as our Father is based upon faith alone in Christ alone for eternal life (Jn. 6:47). Eternal significance and satisfying fellowship w/God as our Friend is based upon faithfulness to Christ (Jn. 15:7-14). Where there is great grace (Eph. 2:8-9) there is great accountability (1 Cor. 3:10-15). As a police officer and a parent I’ve learned to love the person but despise the conduct. Men and women are of great value, but to affirm the absurd in my life (or others) is to miss out on the incredible eternal influence and usefulness God offers to His children (2 Tim. 2:21). I remember that Paul had a “thorn in the flesh” that he struggled with all his life. He asked God but: no change. Still, he continued on without moral compromise on his part. He ran to win the prize. I’m not convinced his goal was to find love, companionship, and family. The life of a disciple does indeed have a yoke and a burden. Failure is a reality in the Christian life (1 Jn. 2:28, 2 Jn. 1:8). Yet there is nothing we can do to separate us from the love of Christ (Rom. 8:38-39). And the Spirit’s assistance at our request to obey the Word (1 Jn. 5:14) along w/the encouragement from the Assembly (Heb. 10:23-25) will make all the difference in our brief moment in time.
I think the rebellion of Korah is instructive here (Num 16). We do not have the complete freedom to redefine or justify the specific ways to live out good virtues. Our feelings are not the standard just as those from Korah found out. Good intentions or seeking to fulfill the provisions of certain relationships (such as friendship) doesn’t cause God to overlook disobedience.
The one thing that is quite puzzling to me about Andy Stanley is that he has had lots of exposure to the truth, but for some reason he desires to embrace certain sinful practices as if he is concerned with appeasing a certain segment of the society rather than God Himself. How do you grow up in the home of Charles Stanley and be resistant to the truth concerning Homosexuality? How do you go to perhaps the leading Evangelical Seminary like Dallas Seminary and come out as lost and confused as people who don’t know the Lord or His Word? It’s very sad!
If I was to caution Andy, about anything, I would caution him that his platform requires great responsibility. I think he would characterize his comments and actions as leading the way, and it’s hard to disagree with that. If the wisdom that is from above his first pure, and then peaceable, then it doesn’t seem that Andy’s leadership in this particular subject is providing purity or peace to the body. He is an important figure, and I think at times overlooks the impact he has. They are better ways to lead the church than to create controversy unnecessarily.
Whenever we put “biblical” in front of something, it adds this connotation of oppressiveness. Just like “biblical womanhood,” “biblical marriage” needs to be shown the door.
I do like how Andy used the term “Jesus drew circles.” I think that’s great. Way to go Pastor Stanley.
Dear Andrea, I must say that I respectfully disagree with your retort concerning using the term “Biblical” in front of something. We live in a culture that thinks that it can do what it wants or feels with no thought to what is proper, and one such thing is the God-ordained institution of Marriage. I think we should be clear as to what constitutes Marriage, and the only source for that information is in the Scriptures, and as Believers, we shouldn’t apologize for upholding God’s truth! Two Men or Two Women cannot be married if we understand what Marriage is as demonstrated in the Scriptures. I argue that the same is true when it comes to the role of Men and Women in the Home and in the Church. Of course, I’m speaking in context of a Biblical/Christian worldview.
Respectfully,
WAYNE
Andrea,
Jesus drew lines, too. And when he pardoned the woman caught in adultery, he told her to go and sin no more.
Jesus is perfect. Do you honestly believe he can tolerate sin?
Dr. Cynthia Norbeck, with all due respect, are you sinless? You’re coming across as such with some of your comments. Do you believe that Christian’s are sinless? They are not. They’re sins are forgiven, yesterday’s, todays and tomorrow’s sins are forgiven by the death and blood of Jesus, but Christians are still sinning. Are they supposed to be working toward the goal of perfection? Of course! There is a high standard for those who accept Christ but He has done the work for now, for our past and beyond. But who is the judge of where someone is at in their journey with Jesus? I’ve heard of drug addicts who never touched a drug again after accepting Christ. Some never completely get victory. Thankfully you aren’t the judge, only the Lord is their judge. Racism in the heart of the white man, whose been serving as an usher in his church for years, the people who consistently overeat and are full of gluttony, yet think nothing of it, or the greedy church goer, who’s love of money is much more than love of their neighbor. The thief on the cross…seems to me most of y’all would have stoned, flogged and hung that guy and said, oh no buddy! To hell with you!!! We are all uniquely made and all come to Jesus differently and HIS timing and work on and in us is different for everyone. And oh, guess what. We can’t see all He is doing in their heart at this moment. God is at work in people that you don’t see.
Wilma,
I am a sinner, saved by grace.
Galatians 2:20:
“My old self has been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me. So I live in this earthly body by trusting in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”
We are talking about allowing sin to permeate the church, as it did in many NT churches. Paul called the church in Corinth out for allowing …
1 Corinthians 5:1:
“It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: A man is sleeping with his father’s wife.”
So, I am not talking about those seeking Christ and his forgiveness. I am talking about so-called Christians who know better. I am talking about those claiming Christ who simultaneously claim that homosexual behavior is fine in the church. Not only are they not repenting of this sexual sin, they are advocating for it.
It’s not okay. It’s sin. Allowing it to permeate the Body of Christ will lead to destruction of the Body of Christ. It needs to be eradicated. It’s why Paul told us to stay away from Christians who know better and persist in sin anyway. He was not talking about repentant Christians – he was talking about unrepentant sinners.
The real question here is the carefully tweaked ambiguous messaging by Andy Stanley. It’s the manipulation and deception that I find alarming. One LGBTQ person said, “…Stanley answers deep questions with equivocating, side-stepping, baby pablum.” Others have wondered out loud when North Point and its satellites will start officiating same-sex weddings and give same sex married couples the same life event recognition as heterosexual couples. North Point used to have a volunteer form on its website that said this: “We teach that sex was created by God as an expression of intimacy between a man and a woman within the context of marriage… In an effort to protect you from a potentially awkward situation, we ask that you not volunteer at this time if:
• You are involved in a sexual relationship and are not married.
• You are pursuing a same sex relationship.” If Andy Stanley never “never subscribed to (Mohler’s) version of biblical Christianity,” why did his volunteer form suggest otherwise? How would there be a potentially awkward situation?
The God I serve hates sin and died for it. He is no pansy. Tell gays the truth: they must repent and believe/trust or they will be hurled into hell. It’s God’s earth and His rules. Yes, walk in love, but love isn’t always a kind reply. Sometimes love is turning over tables, telling Satan to get behind your disciple, rebuking unbelief, or not having anything to do with Christians who say they love God but remain in sin. I’m sticking to the Bible, and that’s that. If the gays want to go to hell, let them. Ask Beckett Cook about how he got saved. Believers told him the truth, and he repented. That’s how I got saved too. Someone hit me upside the head with the truth of God’s word, and I repented.
Ephraim:
Which Bible are you going to trust? Your comment seems very hateful to me. Did you vote for trump and if you did do you feel as strongly about his “sins.”?
Tom,
Beware. Ephraim is spot on. There is a reason the Bible makes clear there is a very narrow path to God, and very few find it. Again, Beware. God is watching and knows exactly what you are thinking. If I were you, I would take a look at what happens to sinners when they die. It’s not pretty.
I guess a question I have (for many on this thread and for the church in general): is there a way to have a conversation about this – and with members of the LGBTQIA+ community – without right fighting?
Marin,
How can we?
1. The qualifications are set – by the creator – not by us.
2. They want the qualifications to be changed instead of changing to meet the qualifications.
3. They are not forced to join, but welcome to join – if and when they meet the requirements,
but they, nor can we, change the requirements.
You cannot be a member of a team and decide you want to wear a different uniform because it looks better on you. Can you?
Indeed, by all means love and respect your neighbor. But do we really want to insinuate God is what – old fashion?
Truth does divide. We shouldn’t be ashamed of defending the truth of God. We don’t have to be hostile or unloving about it either.
In other words……Long answer Nope Short answer No.
As a follow up (and perhaps clearer) question, I ask: does the focal point of the conversation ALWAYS have to be “being right”? Can we have conversations about this to deepen understanding and help others feel heard – even if walk away “agreeing to disagree”?
Some of the best conversations – that ultimately laid the foundation for my closest friendships – were on topics that were quite polarizing. I could point to scriptures to “right fight” if I wanted to, but I put my fight to the side and LISTENED. And I learned there is love in listening. I didn’t even have to do much responding. Many people are hurting, frustrated and resentful solely off of not being heard, and being constantly “shut down”, isolated, or silenced by right fighters. You’d be surprised at the barriers that you can break through by just hearing someone out. How do you expect to share the gospel with people if you constantly enter every conversation with the goal of being right?
Marin,
Your words:
“I could point to scriptures to “right fight” if I wanted to, but I put my fight to the side and LISTENED.”
Do you believe it is possible to listen kindly while contending for the Gospel? I do. We are called to be warriors for Christ. This means we are certain of the faith we profess and are ready to give a reason for what we believe. It does NOT mean we stop listening to the heartache of others and trying to help. We can do both. It’s not an “either-or” situation.
People have always been, and will continue to be, offended by the Gospel. We still present the truth. Most people I know who reject Christ have heard the Gospel for years and honestly don’t think it’s for them. Saying that the Church treats Gays unkindly is a convenient excuse to stay away, don’t you think? Most churches I have ever been involved with have opened their arms to all people with love. Not once have they watered down the truth of the Gospel while doing so.
Cynthia –
I just don’t think the goal of EACH AND EVERY conversation is to be right, even if one is right. It’s like the Christians who go up to the family member of a loved one who was brutally murdered during the memorial and say “God had that happen to her for a reason.” (Yes, I have seen this). Even if that is right, is that the time and place?
I do agree it is a “yes-and” and not an “either-or”. But timing is key. If I’m just listening to someone, and the whole time I am thinking of scriptures or theological points to discredit what they are saying, I’m not listening at all. I’m just preparing to respond.
I believe a lot of what is said and when is up to the Spirit. I know I have had PLENTY of times where the Spirit has whispered to me to be quiet, change my words, or save it for another time. It is VERY important to be Spirit led, especially in these challenging conversations. THAT is what will lead to treating the LGBTQIA community as God intends.
We are not called to be warriors. I’ve never read that in the New Testament, where Chistian instruction is found, maybe ambassadors for Christ, or sheep, as in My sheep hear my voice, but that whole warrior stuff is where many get the right fight attitude and leads down a fight path that I’m not interested in going down with people that Jesus calls us to love and to be His hands and feet to. God created us with two ears and one mouth. That speaks to me that we should listen more than talk. And I would disagree on most churches being welcoming and kind to gays. Heck most white churches aren’t welcoming to people of color yet. I’ve heard that Sunday is the most segregated hour of the week. The truth is we struggle to embrace people who are different than us. I think it’s something we can work on.
“God created us with two ears and one mouth. That speaks to me that we should listen more than talk.”
ar·mor
noun
1. the metal coverings formerly worn by soldiers or “WARRIORS” to protect the body in battle.
Ephesians 6:10-18
The Armor of God
10 Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 11 Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. 13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground
Wilma E,
“Ephesians 6:10-20
10 Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.
11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;
15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
16 Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
18 Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;
19 And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel,
20 For which I am an ambassador in bonds: that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak.”
Marin:
For so many Fundamentalist they always have to have a boogey man and it has been gays for many years. They will find another one after this one loses its traction.
Tom,
Colossians 2: 8-14
8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces[a] of this world rather than on Christ.
9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, 10 and in Christ you have been brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority. 11 In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.
13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross.
Did you think you can advocate for sin after Jesus died to take it away?
Verse 11 says it all. “Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off”.
This comment section should require two little checkboxes, one that reads, “I listened to the sermon” and one that reads, “I did NOT listen to the sermon.” And then each comment should include the commenter’s checked box. :P
Andy Stanley is drawing himself out of the circles that the New Testament clearly established on the matter of associations. The apostle Paul said: ”But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler– not even to eat with such a one” (1 Cor. 5:11).
Paul says, in essence, there is nothing to hear from these people, even less so in a church context. There is not even an association to have with them. Stanley, however, knows better. He is associating himself with two practicing homosexual men and considers it necessary for his church to hear their story. This is wrong, so wrong. And, naturally, he sets Mohler and others who reveal his heresy in a negative light.
Colin:
Your words:
“With respect for your understanding, belief and faith. No individual, neither you nor I, can speak for God. ”
The Holy Spirit speaks for God every single day. Are you acquainted with Him yet?
Wilma:
Yes, we are called to contend for the gospel. We are definitely warriors.
Ephesians 6: 10-17
10 Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 11 Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. 13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. 14 Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 15 and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 16 In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17 Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.
Marin,
Your words:
“I just don’t think the goal of EACH AND EVERY conversation is to be right, even if one is right. It’s like the Christians who go up to the family member of a loved one who was brutally murdered during the memorial and say “God had that happen to her for a reason.” (Yes, I have seen this). Even if that is right, is that the time and place?”
I agree 100% with your comment above. The Bible agrees, too. There is a time and a place for everything. I also agree that it is the Holy Spirit who should be directing the actions/words/behaviors of believers. If we listen, the answer will be provided and we will know how to respond to anyone and everyone with love and compassion.
My main point was simply that the Gospel has POWER – the power of God for salvation, as Paul once said. I don’t want to do anything that will dilute its power. Telling Christians that homosexual behavior is A-okay is a lie. And Satan is the father of lies.
I waited to reply until I could listen to the “sermon”. I already knew that Andy’s teaching is heterodox, but this takes it to new levels. He clearly is teaching the heretical side b theology. The biblical concept of repentance is not in his theology and is replaced with ignorant acceptance. He does not believe that our lusts are sin even if we don’t act on them. He clearly believes that homosexual marriage is just fine. He believes that Christian identity is defined by the person’s sexual sin. Based on all this it is no wonder that his church has so many homosexual children, members, etc. He is leading people straight to hell.