If you've never been to Princeton, New Jersey, you need to go there. It's only 15 minutes from my parents' home. It's so beautiful. But then he taught, again, for 20 years in the south of France, roughly, and then a decade, decade and a half at Westminster Seminary in California. I got to hear much of this, the first class I had at Knox in the Dean In program. But when I told Peter that this morning, he said, oh, I hope so yeah then I didn't even know what I was talking about so this is for your service actually not for us every few weeks I write an article 800 words on some incident in the culture and try to analyze it from this perspective so that you're helped in thinking about this deeper sense of what culture is doing. So if you'd like to get that, just put your name and your email address or whatever on this sheet of paper. Then I want to encourage you, what I'm saying today is much more fully developed in this DVD. And we decided, we did a conference last October And in Escondido, I know it's hidden. You get that? Escondido is indeed hidden. But we were sure that because this is such a burning subject that we would pack out the place. And we didn't. Very few pastors came. And it seemed to me that what we were experiencing then was that Christians don't want to deal with this subject. It's too dangerous. It's too volatile. And especially pastors, because pastors want to be very welcoming. And I appreciate the pastors that have had the willingness here to put on these lectures. But we noticed that that was true of many orthodox pastors. So we decided to make a DVD of the nine lectures that were taking place. And it's on this DVD. And the other reason why it's important to have a DVD, you can watch it in private. You can give it to people and tell them to watch it without necessarily taking on this culturally volatile subject in places where you would feel not very comfortable. So let me encourage you to pick up a copy of this and use it with your friends, your children, and whatever to get the conversation going in a world where they don't want to converse on this subject, right? It's the way it is. So I want to move to the subject of this morning, the first one There's false ways of dealing with homosexuals in the church and their implications. Someone asked me last night, are you here this morning, if you get what the churches were doing? Well, that's what I'm going to speak about now. And then my final lecture will be on how we give a profound answer to the issue. So this first lecture, how the many churches are relating to the subject and where it is and where it will take them. You know, seeing the nature of the culture as I laid it out last night, and I know you understood that what I was saying was not totally ungrounded, it's disturbing to see how many evangelical churches turn to the culture for wisdom on this subject of who we are as human beings in terms of our sexuality. And so there's a way in which this ideology is taking over the thinking of the church, but it's an ideology that comes from a very godless source. This transformation of theology and sexuality in a way that bears no relationship to our past history. And we are going into uncharted territory with this kind of thinking, and so many churches are willing to go that way. And they do it in various ways. One of their ways is to argue that, well, scripture is not that clear on the subject of homosexuality. And so they find all kinds of ways of modifying what the scripture says. There is a book that's just come out with Crossway called Unchanging Witness, which is about this thick. And it goes through the 2,500 maybe years of the Jewish and then the Christian period, and not once Is there any justification in Judaism or Christianity throughout this entire period for the practice of homosexuality? And now in the past decade or so, or two decades, we've had evangelicals saying that the scripture is not that clear. Well, they make it unclear, I know. But that's part of the reason of their argumentation to not really listen to what the scripture is saying. And then they try to argue for the inclusion of homosexuality via the values that Christianity adopts. A number of sources are used. They appeal to Jesus. Jesus is leading me to do this. These churches are called affirming churches, by the way, just so that you get all the terminology. Jesus is leading me to do this. Or love is the reason why I do this. or another powerful reason is the spirit. The spirit has led me to this position. But every one of those sources is extremely subjective. Who is the Jesus leading you to this position? What spirit? And what is your definition of love? So I decided to take a look at what these people are saying, Christians, in various kinds of evangelical churches in particular. There is one reformed church that has taken this position, actually. In San Francisco, the City Church founded by a young fellow that I knew, Fred Harrell, last year has adopted this approach to homosexuality and is now including homosexuals as elders and eventually as pastors. This is a reformed church founded by a church planter of the PCA. Are we in a PCA church? No, we're almost in a PCA church. and a disciple of Tim Keller. So you can see how far this kind of reasoning can take you and take the church. So I want to look at a few ways in which this approach is justified. And after I've looked at that and how these people turn to the culture as the source of their authority, if you like, or justifying why they do it, then I want to show you where looking at the culture will take churches like that. And this is a great warning for Christian orthodoxy. One of the most successful books in this line of thinking is Ken Wilson's book, A Letter to My Congregation. And he appeals to the spirit. The spirit is leading him. Many evangelicals read his book, which came out in 2014, A Letter to My Congregation. But the spirituality to which he makes appeal, it's ironic in this year of the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, even though he calls himself an evangelical, he appeals to Ignatian spirituality. That is Ignatius Loyola, founder of the Jesuits. And of course, the Jesuits were established to lead the counter-Reformation against the Reformation. But now we have the spirituality of the Jesuits seeping into some of these Christian churches to determine why and how we should think about things. And he believes that in this spirituality, this Ignatian spirituality, he can discover what the Spirit is telling him about the issue in question. And he does this because he's very convinced that there are influences upon him of which he must take cognizance. And here are some of the influences. The Millennials are not accepting the Christian perspective. So we must listen to the Millennials. Ah, here is Mr. Fugate. Is that right? One of them. And I was just saying that I'm rectoring today for you. And I just started the subject that you missed. But anyway, he's saying that one of the reasons that he has to go in this direction, the Spirit's telling him, one of the reasons why he must go in this direction is because 60 cents, well, 75% of millennials have totally accepted homosexuality as normative. actually cite that 66% of millennials like Buddhism. But that's another percentage we don't talk about. Why would we listen to a group of people on this subject? He also is concerned that the intelligent people of the city where he is a pastor, whom we would call progressives, believe that taking this position is bigoted and that we may not exclude gays. And so his duty as a pastor is not to do so. One of the things that gives him away, actually, even though he claims to be biblical, is this statement Maybe we are being asked to relax around gender distinctions a little. Who's asking him? The culture does. The culture says sexuality is a spectrum. The Bible doesn't say that. The Bible says sexuality is to us. His way says, maybe we are being asked to relax around gender distinctions a little. Well, yes, that's true. By the pagan culture. That's what the pagan culture is asking. And he thinks that that's a good question. And so he will use this Ignatian spirituality, which sort of leads him in his subjective inner sense. And all these different cultural influences to affirm the validity of homosexual practice. Another powerful factor pushing some people to adopt this open affirming position is, of course, the notion of love. That's what Christians are known for, right? We love people. And this can become very sentimental, of course. Full of theological seminary professor Daniel Kirk agrees with this fellow Ken Wilson. And he says, what if God judges more by willingness to love than on getting ourselves right on any issue? So love is more important than being right. But then what is right love? Ought you think about that as well before you simply base it on your emotions? Someone somewhat closer to home, Nikolaus Woltersdorf, a Dutch origin professor at Calvin, who was so brilliant he was then appointed as a professor at Yale University, and we always thought was a very solid thinker in terms of the biblical approach, says, when those with homosexual orientation act on their desires in a loving, committed relationship, they are not violating the love command. So he's very impressed by his sense of what love is. And of course, he's an ethicist. It's surprising that he didn't ask the question what kind of love is this, or what is the love required by scripture. From a totally different perspective, Jen Hatmaker, considered the new Beth Moore, I heard Beth Moore the other day, quite a powerful woman. Anyway, Jen Hatmaker says this, It is high time Christians open wide their arms to the LGBT community. Your life is worthy and beautiful. There is nothing wrong with you. Jesus still loves us beyond all reason and lives to make us a new restored whole people. Yay for Jesus. So we have to believe with Jen. that Jesus is in favor of new, restored, whole, male-on-male love. That's going a long way for Jesus, I think. I mentioned the City Church in San Francisco, and they also appeal to the love of Jesus to embrace the outsider and make them one with their community. The most influential of these evangelicals is a man by the name of David Gushie, who, in 2015, published a book, Changing Our Mind. David Gushie was known as a leading evangelical ethicist, a professor of ethics. He actually wrote an ethics book with IVP against the practice of homosexuality some years before, but now he has changed his mind. Here is an evangelical ethicist. Now, you would expect him to ask the question, what is love? He doesn't. He assumes that what he feels is love is the right one. And so he goes ahead and changes his mind. Again, being influenced not by the scriptures, which he more or less dismisses. He's influenced by millennials. who find the problem with the traditional church's views about homosexuals unacceptable and are leaving the church. So that's one reason why he's changing his mind. Another reason is people see the church's position as deplorable bigotry. The third reason is His having had transformative encounters with gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Christians, one of them being his own sister. But of course the major one is his understanding of Jesus and love. What happens when people like this sort of play down the Bible, actually, and sometimes not even bother with it at all, and turn towards the present culture for gaining truth on the subject? Well, this part of my lecture is somewhat depressing, but I would suggest to you, and I've been trying to follow this through, that evangelicals who take this position in the name of following Jesus or the Spirit or Christian love end up leaving evangelicalism for a form of so-called Christian liberalism, which leads to interfaith at interfaith acceptance of everything, and then finally into thoroughgoing paganism. And I believe I can show you this. Now, we all know that the main line, which had already given up on evangelicalism a long time ago, finds no problem with accepting now this new agenda of sexual openness. But I was involved in some kind of a way with the famous Nashville statement on sexuality that was issued a few months ago. And I went down to Nashville and was with those who had actually produced the document and we were called upon to vote on the various elements of it. a document endorsed by leading evangelicals. Did any of you ever hear of this? The Nashville Document on Sexuality? It did make something of a splash. But it was signed on for by major evangelicals like J.I. Packer and Al Mohler. Thoroughly evangelical, thoroughly biblical documents. But I was amazed the very next day with the attack on this document by so-called Christians denouncing it in righteous anger and indignation as a hateful attack on people with variant sexual identities. So immediately, large numbers of so-called Christians began to attack this document based entirely on scripture. I did a little bit of research on one of these people, a fellow by the name of Colby Martin, who signed up with one of these counter statements opposing the Nashville statement And in his book that I've read, he tells how he left conservative evangelical orthodoxy over the issue of homosexuality. So this is, you see, what happens for some people. Over this issue of sexuality, they leave conservative evangelical orthodoxy. It makes sense, really, because if you stick with scripture, you can't stick that too long. You have to find a different way of expressing your theological reasoning, and this fellow did. He moved out of conservative unit of orthodoxy, founded a welcoming community that was Uniquely Christian, but not exclusively so. Giving space to people regardless of ethnicity, orientation, age, creed, creed. Oh, so creed isn't important, what you believe. He depends as well on this man, David Gushie. And David Gushie, as well, moved into liberalism pretty quickly. I immediately thought of Jerry Gresham Machen, the great Orthodox theologian, who was reacting against theological liberalism at the beginning of the last century. He's still worth reading, folks. liberalism is coming back through this particular subject now. But it's really doing it for the very same reasons, it seems to me. And it's interesting that Machen saw Christianity, or liberal Christianity, as a form of paganism. And this is the reason why. Here's his definition. of liberalism. It's in his book, oh, Christianity and Liberalism. He doesn't entitle it Christian Liberalism, it's Christianity and Liberalism, which drove a lot of liberals crazy in the Presbyterian Church of which he was a member. The truth is that liberalism has lost sight of the very center and core of Christian teaching. Now, he's going to the essence of it. Many people are doing this, you see, merely arguing that sexuality is a peripheral issue. But then you watch where they go, and they end up actually in the core affirmations of liberalism. That's the problem. The truth is that liberalism has lost sight of the very center and core of the Christian teaching in the Christian view of God, as set forth in the Bible. There are many elements to this teaching of God, but one attribute of God is absolutely fundamental. One attribute necessary, absolutely necessary, that is the attribute of the awful transcendence of God. Keep your mind on that notion of the awful transcendence of God, because what that actually means is that God I wish Machen had known the term twoism, but he had to wait until I was born, and he died by that time. The awful transcendence of God is actually stating in his terms the distinct nature of God as creator. That's the essence, he said, of Christian orthodoxy, and the rejection of it is the essence of liberalism. rejecting God as the transcendent creator. And so the Bible, of course, and Machen believed that, is a word from this God to us. It's not us trying to figure out who we are. It's actually God speaking about himself and the way he made the world to us. And so once you give up on some of the fundamental elements of the Christian faith, you become a liberal. But now people don't see that that's true about sexuality, as I suggested. They think that's a peripheral issue. But of course, if it undermines the very affirmation of who God is as the Creator, then it's not peripheral at all. And Christians in our day are giving up on orthodoxy. The stated clerk of the Presbyterian Church USA, remember, that was the denomination from which my own denomination, the PCA, separated in 1973. That denomination joined, actually, with the Southern Church and the Northern Church together to form the Presbyterian Church USA, which now, that's its name now. And here's what the stated clerk of this denomination recently said. Despite Christ proclaiming the death of the Presbyterian Church, we remain a viable interfaith and ecumenical partner in many local communities while proclaiming a prophetic witness throughout the world. So the future, you see, of this liberalism is interfaith, joining with all the other religions of the world because, of course, all the religions are one. So what happens to people who affirm the validity of homosexuality to be practiced in the Church, well, they're forced, actually, to realize that they're going against Scripture and they must leave the Church. And, indeed, this is what David Gushie, the evangelical ethicist, did in May 2017. He announced his definitive departure from evangelicalism. the evangelical ethicist has now departed from evangelicalism over this issue of sexuality. And I wonder what will happen to young evangelical pro-affirming homosexuals who follow David Gushie, like you may have heard of Matthew Vines, a young A very young man who wrote an important book on this subject who actually says, I believe all of scripture is inspired by God and authoritative for my life. But this young man is a follower of David Gushie. Where will he end up? I have no doubt where he will end up because At the end, when you leave this fundamental issue of who we are as human beings created by God in His image, there's no way you can remain orthodox. You might think that it's only a peripheral. Oh, I just decided the other day that I was a female. I've been a male all my life, but who cares? But what you are actually saying is, there is no God external to me, who made the world the way it is and who made me the way I am, to whom I must submit myself. And you have immediately taken steps away from orthodoxy. This happened to Brian McLaren. Some of you have heard of the name Brian McLaren, who is a leader of the Emergent Movement. Now, he is fully pro-homosexual, But he was doing this while he was becoming a liberal long before the homosexual movement. It turns out that he has both a son and a daughter who are both homosexuals. So maybe this is just a fulfillment of a prophecy. I don't know. But this leader of this movement has become thoroughly liberal and interfaith. And the reason why I know this is I read his books. But one interesting experience I had when I first came over from Europe and was teaching at Westminster, and I heard about a conference in Chicago in 1993 put on by the Parliament of the World's Religions. And this was a celebration, 100th celebration of the first Parliament of the World's Religions in Chicago in 1893. And I'd begun to be interested in, if that's my wife, tell her I'm lecturing. I'd started to be interested in all this, what was happening in religion in America. And I thought, I've got to go to this. So I asked the authorities at Westminster to pay my way. They wonder, why on earth would we do that? It's got nothing to do with us. And yet, they actually had the wisdom to send me along. So I arrive at this conference. not as an invitee, by the way, as an observer, along with 8,000 attendees from 125 different religions. And it was quite stunning to look down on this platform with all the leaders of all the religions, the Buddhists and the Hindus and the Roman Catholic cardinal, and the liberal professors, and at the far end was the high priest of the Fellowship of Isis. In other words, a witch. But see, once you're interfaith, you have to accept witchcraft. Because it's another faith. And interfaith means you have a connection with all the faiths. You can't pick and choose once you've decided. And so that, to me, is the reason why interfaith finally does lead to paganism, because you introduce so thoroughly affirming pagans into the group that there's no way out for you. Anyway, so I'm observing this. I observe these 8,000 delegates dance around a massive ballroom at the Palmer House in Chicago, their arms linked, proclaiming the unity of all the religions. But it was very interesting. There was one religion that was not invited and was consistently being identified as the great enemy of religious peace. Guess what it was? Orthodox Christianity. It wasn't there. None of the plenary speakers, none of the smaller groups. In fact, in the smaller groups, I could hear it. It was an attack on Christianity. The terminology was not being used, but there you saw Oneism celebrating its unity, and it was attacking the one system that cannot be integrated into it, namely, evangelical, biblical Christianity, which is twoist. You cannot join Oneism to twoism. There's no third thing that results. And I saw that, maybe this is why I started understanding Roy more than I gave to you in Knox those many years back, because I began to realize to what extent this is moving forward. I don't think I use one-ism or two-ism in Knox either. So he's trying to dismiss me as one of these guys that said it all. What date was that, by the way? okay well I certainly had to keep my thinking cap on as I'm trying to ingest all of this stuff and I watched this event and I realized there was something fundamental distinguishing all these religions on the one hand and then making Christianity the enemy orthodox historic Christianity there were liberals there who joined in Well, I recently learned that another celebration of this Parliament of the World's Religions took place in Salt Lake City in 2015. And I'd better watch my watch, by the way. Oh, dear. Where does the time go when you're talking about this kind of thing? One of the plenary speakers at this event was Brian McLaren. Plenary speaker. This man who had been an evangelical was now being pushed by the liberals as a plenary speaker at this Parliament of the World's Religions. Well, I'm not surprised. One of my recent 800-word articles, you should go on my website and read it, was all about Brian McLaren. who talks about the great migration, the great migration out of Christianity. And here's what he says about God. God must no longer be understood as a separate, omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent creator. If ever that is paganism, I don't know anything else that would qualify. Christianity has to lose its monotheistic notions of God. This is an evangelical pastor who is now leading the forces of interfaith. But since I'm running out of time, you don't get so much of what I have to say. But the it's very interesting to see what's happening in terms of where people go theologically over this issue of sexuality. One really fascinating person is a gay theologian by the name of Michael Clark who teaches at Emory University in Atlanta and who was raised in a Christian church who gave some deep thought to his feelings of homosexuality many years ago, now describes himself as a Scripture-phobe and doesn't think that Scripture has any authority over him. But what he understands, and I'll get to him a little later, what he understands is that Christianity is not refusing his sexuality because it's negative. he understood some years back that it couldn't be fitted into the biblical system as a system. So that he had to reject the entire system. And he boldly does so. And I certainly recognize the clarity of his thinking. Here's what he says, being a gay man or lesbian entails far more than sexual behavior alone. Ah. This, you see, is where I want to take you as believers. That this issue of sexuality is not just freedom for civil rights for a few people to do what they want to do on the side. Let me read that again. Being a gay man or lesbian entails far more than sexual behavior alone. It entails a whole mode of being in the world. He realized he could not remain in Christianity and pursue his homosexual desires. He says, there is something in our gay lesbian being that appears to heighten our spiritual capacity. That's also interesting. And he leaves Christianity because he cannot find a model for his sexual choices in the Bible. And you know where he turns? He goes to animistic American Indian spirituality, and finds the shaman called a Badache, B-E-R-D-A-C-H-E, a Bedeci, born a male but choosing to live as a female as the desirable gay spiritual model. Because, he said, and here he understands one-ism better than many one-ists do, though he doesn't use the term, because he never read my book, unfortunately. By the way, you should all read this book. One or two. There are a few copies back there. Do use, take them, use them. Give them to your kids to read. This is a battle we're engaged in, folks. And it isn't going to go away soon. Here's what he said. He understood the oneness character of homosexuality. Because the Vadachi, he says, achieves the reunion of the cosmic sexual and moral polarity. In other words, it's non-binary. He doesn't use that term, because that wasn't in vogue then. Joining the opposites is classic paganism. You have to take what God separated and join them together. And that's what we find. In many pagan books, it's not always talked about in terms of sexuality. It's often talked about in other elements to our existence. So I have a few minutes to develop then this point that I wanted to get to. And by jumping over a whole series of pages, I can do it. And that is the history of homosexuality. In terms of how it's been practiced in the past, we think we're just discovering this new expression of sexual freedom. And that in terms of our progressive notions of human freedom, we now all must open our arms to this new way of thinking about sexuality. But I've read a number of serious studies, some of them in favor of it, by the way, that show that homosexuality has been practiced through time and space forever. You can go back to the second millennium BC, to the goddess Ishtar, who was served by homosexual priests. That's the second millennium BC. We have the spiritual use of homosexuals to lead pagan religions. a Romanian scholar by the name of Mircea Eliade, a great expert in the history of religions. And at Westminster, at all seminaries, you have his Encyclopedia of Religion, which is 13 volumes of the entire history of religions. And he was always in favor of developing what he called the new humanism. which included the integration of homosexuality to develop this new humanism. But he couldn't help but see, through all these pagan religions he was analyzing throughout time and space, what he called ritual androgynization. I know that's a big word. Androgynization. Androgyny means the joining of male and female in the same person. Do you know that? Androgyny is taking andros and gune, the two Greek terms, putting them together, making the term androgyny to describe someone who sees himself as both male and female. And that becomes a way of referring, you see, to homosexuality, because in a homosexual couple, both men have to both play the role of the female. So it is indeed an androgynous acting out of this reality. Well, Messea Eliade talks about ritualized androgynization because he notices that in all these cults, the androgynous or homosexual priest has the crucial role, the joining of the opposites, of getting rid of the binary, of affirming the non-binary character of existence. And he pointed out that you have homosexual priests in ancient Mesopotamia, in Indo-European religions, in the aboriginal practices in Australia, in African tribes, in South American Indians, the Pacific Islands. It's all over the place. When the conquistadores went into South America, where I will be on Monday, in fact, I have here a citation of a wonderful Spanish scholar, Mario Seli, Teología Gay y Preferencia Homosexual, who does some research on homosexuality in South America, and the conquistadores, who, for one reason or another, they were trained as Christians anyway, they wiped out homosexuality in South America, seeing it as one of these horrendous practices. But it was being practiced all over the place. Well, I have so much material here, specifically proving that this is the case that I'm going to have to jump over it. But when the Old Testament says, you shall not do as they do in the land of Egypt, where you lived, and you shall not do as they do in the land of Canaan, believe me, Moses is knowing what was being practiced in these pagan religions. With a certain amount of deference, he doesn't go into the details. In Leviticus 18.20, he does say a man should not cohabit with a man. That's being clearly said. But it's all in the context of you may not do what they do in the pagan religions. And so, you see, this practice is classic paganism. And Iliade himself recognizes what it is. He says that androgyny is a symbolic restoration of the undifferentiated unity that was believed to precede the creation. So it's the idea of getting back to the goal where everything is unified, where there is no creator, just unified everything, the sort of ultimate cosmic one-ism. Jumping over all kinds of material, I was fascinated to discover that one of the architects of the 60s counter-reformation, it was a counter-reformation, but a counter-revolution, was a woman by the name of June Singer. who wrote a book in 1977 entitled, Androgyny Towards a New Sexuality. So the age of Aquarius was also expected or hoped to be also the age of androgyny. Guess what? We're seeing the fulfillment of that vision now. This is the world in which you live, folks, which is where your young people are being trained to think sexually. It has incredible spiritual implications to it. And here's what she says. What lies in store as we move towards the long-for conjunction of the opposites, that is, the non-binary view of life. Can the human psyche realize its own creative potential through the building of its own cosmology and supplying it with its own gods? In other words, not just individual practice, but now a cosmology, an ideology that will take over the entire culture. But the best phrase, Probably somebody would have suspected that I invented just to fit with what I'm saying, but I didn't. I found it in June Singer's work. She says this, the archetype of androgyny, I'll read it slowly, but I want it to be her words, appears in us as an innate sense of and witness to the primordial cosmic unity, cosmic one-ism. That is, and this is the key phrase, it is a sacrament of monism. A sacrament. Do you realize what this woman is saying? That this practice of homosexuality is the preferred way of experiencing the non-dual world of cosmic unity. And she says it was nearly totally expunged by the Judeo-Christian tradition. I wonder why. Because, of course, we have this conflict between a oneist view of existence, a cosmic view, which includes and privileges, actually, homosexuality, and a twoist view of existence that is behind heterosexuality and God making us male and female. Do you see the conflict here? This is not simply civil rights, folks. This is a confrontation of two views of existence, of reality. And with that, I can stop. I did it. But I'd be happy to take one or two questions, though, because our next lecture is at 11, right? It is 11. Then we don't have time. Well, two questions. Yes? Is there a sense in which this is actually a pretty good thing? Oh, yes. absolutely that's right no in a sense androgyny or homosexuality only confirms the theological affirmation that's why this woman calls it a sacrament It's a physical embodiment of this spiritual notion. So people are pushing this because it does indeed give force to a larger worldview. And, of course, doing that, it can oppose the Christian view of existence and get you all to be called bigoted, anti-human, closed-minded people. There's nothing true about that. Really, you are the most open-minded because at least you know there are two worldviews that are in radical contradiction one to the other. How many people in our world know that today? They are bathed in a total ignorance about the ultimate issues of existence. That's why you have such a crucial role to play individually and as parents and so on in communicating truth to this generation. I think it's a powerful moment to be alive, actually. It's scary because of where one-ism can take us, but it won't win. It will implode because it's totally against the way God made the world, which he pronounced good, by the way, actually very good. So this is where we are. One more question. Yes. I don't touch the practical. I wish I did, but the law doesn't seem fit to place me in a situation where I can actually deal with practical issues. I'll let you answer your question. Yeah, yeah, we have people who were homosexuals who discovered that they could get out of it and so on. well you know what we're all going to help we're all going to help Right? And I always feel like it's a bad approach to go to a homosexual and say, you're going to hell. When this poor kid felt he was a homosexual from the age three, and he doesn't know why, and often it's sort of too big for him. And I think what is more helpful is to say to a kid like that, you are the result of the fall. which is going to hell. And if you don't change your ways, what you're doing now will communicate that you are in favor of the fall and you will go to hell. But give the guy some space to hear the gospel in terms of not just moralistically accusing him of some awful sin over which he doesn't understand much. it's a result all alright what's the time sure sure Interesting stuff, huh?