You'll probably encounter this most forcefully in a corporate setting, a military setting, a school setting. If you're going to the grocery store or going to Starbucks, whatever the case may be, you may not be quite under the jaws of dilemma that you wouldn't be if you were in a corporate setting. But it's appropriate for all of us to know what we're going to say and to be, frankly, be prepared to respond in advance so we're not trying to wing it when we have these discussions because this is not going to go away anytime soon when we're told to call a transgender person by their new name. So it does matter. This is not a subject that we can equivocate on. It's more than simply picking pronouns. There's so much more that could be said, but Andrew Walker, page one of the notes, who's with Southern Seminary, makes a very pertinent observation and it goes to one of the solas of the Reformation, sola scriptura. You may remember that when we talked about the Reformation solas, a very foundational sola is sola scriptura. The scripture alone is our foundational basis for our faith and practice. And it is really what guides us, what directs us in all of our lives. So he makes the point that Where the true debate resides is that Christianity views reality through the lens of scripture. Culture, of course, views reality through shifting shadows that essentially are very malleable. They change. The subject that we're dealing with today, which is transgender, is really a fairly recent vintage. I mean, I grew up in the 50s and nobody that I was aware of even could have even imagined anything that we're dealing with now. But the pivotal feature that I think we'll talk about a little bit later is Bruce Jenner, who goes under the name of Caitlyn. And interestingly enough, he's a political conservative, but he's a transgender individual. But Christianity, our basis is the scripture. That's our authority. We have to start there, that's where we end. And there's an entire vocabulary that has developed around this, and I had to sort of school myself on this, because I don't live and die with these words every day, but sex and gender, when I was growing up, were exactly the same thing. They're not the same thing in today's parlance. Sex is your anatomical apparatus when you're born. I recently filled out an online survey for some surgery I've got coming up, and the question that was asked was, what was your sex assigned at birth? Well, that's the language of today. What was your sex assigned at birth? Gender is a social construct, according to this gender ideology. And there's an entire panoply of other words. If you want to really be disillusioned, just Google, as I did, sex, gender, and see what comes up. But if you look at the NIH, the National Institute of Health, or psychology today, you'll find this very elaborate discussion of all of the vocabulary. And sex and gender are only two of the words. You've got gender dysphoria and all of the other words that are out there. But sex and gender, biblically, are coterminous, are the same. The sex that you're assigned at birth is your gender. So if you're born a male, you're a male regardless of what your ideology would prefer. We find ourselves at loggerheads with the culture because the culture has no absolute basis for arriving at any form of morality or immorality or any form of truth. I think it would be fair to say that culturally the whole concept of absolute truth has dissipated many, many years ago. It's entirely relativistic. And that's what gives rise to the dilemma that we find ourselves in today, culturally. But the scripture is very clear in Genesis 1, that God created man, male and female, binary. The binary construct is entirely biblical. Anything other than that is not biblical. And so culture will try to bifurcate or split this concept of gender and sex to accommodate individual preferences, individual ideologies, whatever the case may be. And if you look at the vocabulary, it used to be LGBT and now it's LGBTQIA+. And I'm not sure where it goes from there, but I had to actually look that up to figure out what all the letters represent. But it changes virtually monthly, if not daily and it's to say fluid is an understatement. It's entirely a fluid environment that we live in in terms of ideology. But Denny Burke has been very helpful. He's with Southern Seminary and Andrew Walker's with Southern as well. Actually Denny Burke is with Boyce College which is affiliated with Southern Seminary. But I read Denny's work some years ago when he was writing on what was then a very fresh topic, and that had to do with same-sex attraction. Today, that's old news, but some years ago, that was a very fresh and troublesome concept, same-sex attraction. It even permeates discussions in some conservative denominations these days. But Danny Burke says this, we're not allowed to speak in ways that are fundamentally dishonest as believers. and that undermine the truth of God's word about how he made us in the world. That's the mandate that we have as believers. We cannot be dishonest. Transgender ideology is fundamentally a revolt against God's truth. That's not an overstatement to say a revolt. It's an entire rejection of biblical truth and biblical authority, of God's authority. I say that because if you look at Genesis 3, Satan's overture to Eve was, has God said? Question the authority of God's word, even the meaning of God's word. Today, the question is not, has God said? It's an entire denial. God has not said. Well, even the construct of God is disenfranchised. So it's a revolt against divine authority in every form and fashion. It encourages people, and truly some are very disturbed and hurting people. We have to recognize that, The ravages of sin are all around us, and the suffering can be very real. That doesn't excuse the sin that manifests itself, but it requires us to some extent to be compassionate and understanding of the conflicts that people are experiencing. We don't embrace it, we don't endorse it, but it's important that we realize that some of these people are really conflicted. They're struggling in a very real way. but it's not helpful to them to deny the truth, of course. That's not something that we can do. And he says, we do not serve them or love them well by speaking as if transgender fictions are true. And I think he makes a very important point. We don't love them well. In Leviticus 19, 18, the second great commandment is articulated in the law, and that's to love our neighbors ourself. Our neighbor is not simply another believer. It's whomever we find by the side of the road, if I can use that metaphor from scripture. When you had the Good Samaritan, there were those the religious authorities walked by, unmoved, and then there was one who looked at someone in need and addressed that, paid their lodging, cared for them, didn't ask questions about their ideology, just saw someone in need and addressed it. And I think we need to recognize that to love our neighbor is not an option, it's a necessity. So that doesn't mean we embrace our neighbor's ideology, it doesn't mean that we endorse our neighbor's ideology, it doesn't mean that we compromise our own biblical convictions, but to have empathy and understanding is imperative that we do that. But the scripture, and we could go through many of these, but just by way of example, in Isaiah 5, woe to those who call evil good and good evil. Recall, of course, in Genesis 1, at the end of chapter 1 of Genesis 1, 31, God saw all that he has made, and he said, it's very good. He created man, male and female. And among all the things that God had made, he created a binary world, male and female, man in his own image, male and female, and he characterized that as very good. So our culture is taking what God has deemed to be very good and not only cast question marks around it, but has deemed it to be wrong, to be evil, because someone is imposing a biblical construct, a form of absolute authority upon someone. We don't live in a world that even recognizes absolute authority. It's entirely relativistic. But in Genesis 1, the scripture says, and God said, let us, so you've got an overture of the Trinity right at the very beginning of the Bible, let us make man in our image, According to our likeness and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle And over all the earth This is the dominion mandate and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth and God created man in his own image In the image of God he created him male and female He created them on page two If you were to look at the Westminster standards, or at least a part of them, Westminster Shorter Catechism is so clear, and it goes right to Genesis 1, 26 and 27. The question is, how did God create man? God created man in a binary world, male and female, after God's image, with dominion over the creatures. And so, this has been the historic understanding of scripture, and it should be, because the scripture is absolutely clear. There's no ambiguity whatsoever about what God has made. And so, as man perpetuates himself biologically, the binary world still exists, even though it's rejected by our culture. Well, if you're of my vintage, you remember Bruce Jenner. Maybe some of the younger ones here don't, but he was actually regarded in his day as one of the greatest athletes of all time. He won the decathlon in the Olympics. And if you, Wheaties, I don't know if anybody eats Wheaties, but they would have athletes on the front of their boxes. And Bruce Jenner was on one of those boxes. If you can find a Bruce Jenner box of Wheaties unopened, it's worth several hundred dollars today. But that's, that's an example of someone who was of notoriety in a very public way, a tremendous athlete who transfigured himself to be a woman. His name that he uses currently is Caitlin. and he appears, I'm told, on Fox TV from time to time, and he endorses a number of conservative causes, including pro-life causes of all things, but Caitlyn, but it's Bruce Jenner. So Denny Burke makes this comment, and it's very helpful. He said, I think Christians are at their best when they recognize a need for both compassion and truth-telling. Compassion for those who experience painful alienation from their own bodies and truth-telling in the face of fictional accounts of gender identity. But he goes on to say that transgenderism is a denial, an absolute rejection of God-ordained differences between male and female. And every reputable Christian commentator that you read on this subject will default immediately to Genesis 1, 26 and 27, because this is what the scripture says. Right at the very foundational part of God's word, God created man, male and female. It's an untruthful suppression of the sexual binary that God has encoded into every cell of our bodies. The problem is not with the body, but with the mind. Or you could say the problem is with the soul. But it's not the body, it's not what God has created, it's how we respond to what God has created. Sam Albury made the comment that the conflict is an evidence of how sin distorts us, not how God made us. left a severe imprint on God's creation. We need to recognize that. In the thinking of the unsaved world that we live in, the imprint of the sin is everywhere, and that's Romans 1. It's played out right in front of us. We see the world that God has made, the beauty of what God has made, and we reject the fact that there is a God who's made that, and we replace the Creator with the creation in many ways, and we reject the authority of God. And if you even survey chapter one of Paul's epistle to the Romans, you'll see exactly what's playing itself out in our world today in the transgender ideology. And the larger gender studies world is exactly what is being described in Romans chapter one, no question about that. You know, you look at this, and in our world, the next paragraph talks about transgender ideology says that we must refer to transgender persons by their assumed name. Now, even the word tolerance has undergone a massive redefinition. When I first came in contact with the word tolerance, it meant that I would understand and even conceivably respect, although not agree with or embrace or endorse a contrary point of view. But I didn't necessarily have to be contentious about it, but I would acknowledge that there is another point of view. Today, tolerance does not mean simply acknowledging that there is an alternative point of view. It means that you must endorse it, that you cannot reject it, that you must embrace it. So the word require, as I mentioned earlier, perhaps the privilege of not operating in a corporate world anymore. I can't even imagine operating in an executive capacity in a corporate environment with today's HR rules in terms of these redefinitions. But you'll find this if you're working in a corporate world, or as an employee of some sort, or in a school setting, or in the military, you will absolutely encounter the word require. It's a mandate, it's a cultural word in which we live. Well, Christians, and I'll use that in a fairly broad sense, evangelicalism as a whole has had a number of responses to how believers should respond to this. There's a fellow named Marty Duran, and I don't agree with him at all, but this represents at least a segment of evangelicalism. He says that he has no problem using the feminine pronouns. And he explains on the top of page three of the notes, and this is very important that we understand this. I reject it entirely, but I understand it. He believes that we close off opportunities for evangelism if we don't go along with the way transgender people want to be named. Now, if you understand total inability and you understand efficacious grace and you understand the doctrine of election, you'll know that it's impossible to get in the way of God's work in an unsaved heart simply based on your choice of pronouns. You may say something that is uncomfortable with another person, and we don't have to be contentious, by the way. We'll talk about Romans 12, 18, insofar as it is up to you, be at peace with all men. That doesn't mean that being doctrinally correct Theologically sound means that we have to badger people or to be unkind to them. We shouldn't, we should be gracious. We should speak as we'll talk about this, the truth and love. Both of those are imperatives, the truth and love. That doesn't mean that we compromise. It doesn't mean that we equivocate, but it doesn't mean that we have to be contentious. It doesn't mean that we have to be obnoxious. That's not an indication of biblical orthodoxy or spirituality to be obnoxious. So it, but, but to speak truth into, a dark world, as Paul says in Philippians 2.15, were to be lights shining in the midst of a dark and perverse generation. Doug Wilson, and I don't agree with everything Doug Wilson embraces either, but he takes the point of view, he simply calls him Jenner. I spoke with someone recently in one of our own congregation, they said just call him friend, and that's fine, that's perhaps a way to do it. I just imagine myself sitting in a boardroom or a meeting And I'm being addressed, I'm being asked to address various people in the room. That's where the rubber hits the road, just calling someone friend when they want to be called Caitlin is a problem. So we have to be careful to think about what will you say in that setting when you find yourself there. And we'll touch on that as we get there. Danny Burke talks about a couple of principles that have been helpful to him as he processes this, and how do we respond? First of all, avoid unnecessary provocation. Unnecessary is to be avoided. In Romans 12, 18, offensiveness doesn't necessarily equal faithfulness. I think we realize that, whether we're at Hope Clinic or whether we're dealing in a corporate world or whether we're dealing with our neighbor or some other content that we find ourselves in, offensiveness isn't biblical, necessarily, to be faithful. Offensiveness might be an evidence of fidelity, it could be, it could be, the message itself may be, or it might be an evidence that we're just simply pugnacious. And that, by the way, pugnacious means a striking personality or a fighting or a contentious, contumacious personality. The wise person ponders how to answer. It requires thought. It requires some care. It requires some deliberation. The wise person is persuasive because he's constantly strategizing or thinking, and that's what Proverbs 16, 24 talks about. How do we bring light and healing if God would grant healing in a difficult environment? We should be seeking a positive environment, if at all possible, with our unsaved friends. When it comes to a gospel witness, We need to build bridges wherever we can. That doesn't mean we compromise. And I think you understand that. But just for the record, that doesn't mean that we equivocate on truth. But we try to build bridges. We try to ask questions. We try to understand. We can't always put ourselves in the shoes of that other person. But we can take an effort to get to know them, to ask about them and what makes them tick and some of their background. Sometimes that can be very helpful because they may have encountered someone who names the name of Christ who's simply been very abrasive and hasn't shown any interest in them as an individual. That's not building a bridge. If we take the time, and I do this when I go to a grocery store, I try to address people by name. I've gotten to know them. They're familiar with me. They know I'm a Christian. But I take a time to talk to them about their lives, and it's helpful. but we need to know how can we address sinners with truth. This paragraph at the bottom of three references Acts 17. This is when Paul was in Athens in an entirely pluralistic world, a pagan world, a polytheistic world, an agnostic world, certainly not sympathetic to a biblical mindset. And when the scripture says, In 1 Corinthians 9, I become all things to all men. That doesn't mean that we become biblical chameleons. It doesn't mean that we change our stripes based upon what type of context we find ourselves in. But it means that we try to take away whatever encumbrances might exist that get in the way of a constructive conversation. As long as our conscience is not being violated, as long as our doctrinal convictions are not being compromised, That's what the scripture is talking about when he says, I become all things to all men. That doesn't mean that Paul became a biblical chameleon. It doesn't mean that he became literally an unsaved Jew to unsaved Jews. It doesn't mean that at all. You couldn't change who he was, nor would he even want to do that. It simply means that he tried to get roadblocks out of the way in the process of communicating biblical truth. So at the top of the next page, we talked about avoiding unnecessary confrontation or provocation. But the antithesis to that or the other side of the coin, if I can use that, is to embrace necessary, the unavoidable provocation. And it is unavoidable. It will find its way into our lives. So what do we do? Ephesians 4.15 calls upon us to be those who speak truth in love. At the same time, truthing in love. We don't equivocate on the truth, but we speak in love. And we're not allowed to speak in ways that are fundamentally dishonest and that undermine the truth of God's word about how he made us and the world transgender ideology. And this is a quote that I mentioned earlier is a revolt against God's truth. At the end of that paragraph, he makes a very helpful comment that we don't serve them or love them well by speaking as if the transgender lies are true. They're not true. So we can't acknowledge that because we can't simply endorse error. We would never do that as believers. So we speak truth, but we speak it in a context of love. We love our neighbor. Ephesians 5.11, we're called not to have fellowship with, or accompany with, or participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but expose them. So we always speak the truth in love. And that means that there will be times of friction that will be unavoidable. Next paragraph, we do our neighbors and loved ones no favors by speaking in ways that conceal the truth of God. An enemy will tell you what you want to hear But this is very important. A real friend will tell you what you need to hear. And that's what a believer will do that. We will speak truth into their lives. It will be uncomfortable for them. I had people speak things into my life, whether it was my father or a fellow believer, a believer who was trying to share the gospel with me, or even being corrected over time, which is inevitable. And if someone loves me, they will tell me the truth. They will tell me things I need to hear. And there may be discomfort with that, but I respect that. That doesn't mean that our unsafe friend will respect that. He may not, or she may not respect it, but it's imperative for us to speak truth into their lives and not to camouflage the truth or equivocate on the truth. So we can't camouflage our convictions. We can't compromise our convictions. but we have to speak truthfully and that includes the choice of pronouns. So I think you can kind of get an idea of where Denny Burke is coming on this. So the question is, so let's put some shoe leather into this. So you find yourself in this setting and I really can't overemphasize the importance of thinking in advance of how you're going to address these situations so that you don't find yourself sort of rambling along and saying something that you wish you had back. So you need to think through this. That doesn't mean that you have to take exactly what's being said here, but this next article by this particular individual is, he's writing from the perspective of sort of the HR world, our rights. We have civil rights. We're not required, by the way, to say things that we don't believe in. We're not required to say things that we regard as error. Even if an HR mandate calls for that, we cannot be compelled to speak error. But we need to understand the world in which we're operating and what we're being asked to participate in and why. So when you look at your personnel policy that just came out from the HR department or whatever the world is and it deals, we need to understand the framework of what is being said. Next paragraph, no one, can or should force you to pay allegiance to this new belief with your words. This whole transgender world is new. It truly has no scientific basis behind it whatsoever. You will find scientists and commentators saying it does, but it has always been the case that if you have XX chromosomes, you're a male, or XY chromosomes, you're a male. and XX chromosomes, you're female. That's your gender or your sex that's assigned at birth, and that will be your sex when you die, and all points in between, and it's not malleable, even though someone may identify as something else other than what God has assigned them at birth. But we're not required to say things that are not true. We're not required to pay allegiance to constructs that are contrary to our biblical conventions. You know that. So this is, again, this particular article is dealing more, it's not necessarily the biblical constructs, but what do we do, what do we recognize in terms of our rights and responsibilities as citizens in this world? So this new belief not only assumes that anyone can self-identify, as something other than their biological sex or gender, it holds that all others must fully recognize and accept that a biological male can be every bit a woman in a natural born woman is. That's the world that we live in. I'm glad I'm not in that corporate environment anymore. But it's a new world. It literally has sprung up in recent years. And there is no scientific basis for this and there's no moral basis for it either. So the last paragraph, the request, and really in some cases it may be the mandate to use gender pronouns. is based on an evolving ideology, and you absolutely have the right to choose not to participate in it. So this is being written sort of from a quasi-legal perspective. I've addressed the biblical perspective. So we need to think about at least what we have constitutionally now. So the top of page six, this is a scripted interchange. And again, you're not required or necessarily being encouraged to parrot these words. It's an example. But I think it's a good example. So the first scenario is you're being asked, what are your preferred pronouns? And it goes essentially in an escalating form. So someone's becoming more and more insistent that you articulate what your preferred pronouns are. So the first answer is thank you for the invitation to give my pronouns so that I never And misgendered, by the way, misgendered means I'm being called something other than what I want to be called. That's exactly what it means. But to be honest, being misgendered is not a concern for me. And if it's not a concern for me, it shouldn't be a bothersome for you either. That ought to be the end of the conversation. Well, if they say, well, this is really a traumatizing world that we live in, and you need to articulate what your pronouns are. Second answer is if anyone's confused about my gender, it would not offend me in the least. That's an honest answer. So there is no concern for anyone here. I would forgive them immediately." That's not a bad response. But then they want to press it further, and this is where you close the door. I trust I was as clear as I possibly could that being misgendered is not a concern. That's why I choose not to announce my own personal pronouns. I hope I will not be disrespectful by having to explain myself again on this matter. That's pretty assertive. I have no problem with any of these answers. It's not necessarily something that you have to put on a three by five card and carry around in your pocket so that you can repeat it, but you need to think about how will you respond when you're being asked on your name tag or in your conversation or in your boardroom, whatever the case may be, what your pronouns are. I never encountered that and I'm grateful I didn't. But now here's where it gets sticky and that is when you're asked to use other people's pronouns. And so the premise, which is fallacious, of course, is that it's for their personal safety, because they'll get triggered if you use the wrong pronoun, and it will create anxiety and traumatizing experience, et cetera. And so the top of page seven says, we must understand that this is precisely what gets us into deep and troubling waters. People are being compelled are required to use language that is contrary to their own beliefs about what it means to be human. And in civil society, it violates freedom of speech and freedom of conscience. So if someone is insisting that you use pronouns that are contrary to their sex, you're not required to do that from a civil standpoint. And biblically, you know that you can't speak error. So we have to find ways of addressing this, whether you call them friend or you call them, one example that was given earlier was when Bruce Jenner, he just calls him Jenner. And that's an option too. You can call them by their last name. But then the question is, do you call them Mr. Jenner or Mrs. Jenner? Just call them Jenner. But you're going to have to think about what you're going to say, because you're going to be in a meeting, and someone's going to be sitting in the room with you, and they're going to be wanting to be addressed by someone other than, hey, they're the third guy from the left, or third, you can't even say guy, third person from the left. You can't do that. You can't get away with that. So you're going to have to think about what you're going to say. But saying something that's untrue is not an option. But know that you're not required in a civil world that we're in, at least presently, to say something that's a lie and that you don't agree with. Just to close this particular section off, as much as is possible, now we're defaulting back to Romans 12, 18. So the guiding principles here, Romans 12, 18, insofar as is possible, be at peace with all men and Ephesians 4, 15, speak the truth and love. Those are the biblical principles. And the foundational verse behind that is Genesis 1, 26 and 27, God created man, male and female. Those three verses provide the entire biblical construct for you to process. to speak the truth in love insofar as is possible, be at peace with all men, and to recognize that God has created a binary world. Well, just to close this off, this was incredibly powerful to me, and I hope that you can understand why. If you know the name Rosaria Butterfield, you know Rosaria Butterfield came from probably one of the most liberal misguided environments that you could possibly have. I think she was teaching gender studies at Yale, or one of the Ivy League schools, and a lesbian at the time. And a Reformed Presbyterian built a bridge to her and didn't equivocate, invited her over. They had conversations together, had coffee together, shared the gospel. God opened her heart. She ultimately came to saving faith. In a seeker-sensitive church, she's not in a liberal church, she's in an RPCNA church, which is one of the most solid confessional Presbyterian denominations you'll find on planet Earth. The Reformed Presbyterian Church in North America is a very, very solid denomination. And she's a stalwart believer. God radically saved her. God used a believing person to build a bridge into her life and shared truth with her, did not equivocate on the truth. And God used the truth. The Holy Spirit granted new life. The Holy Spirit took away a heart of stone and gave her a heart of flesh, just by the way, just like he did with you. We may not be transgender or those other LG, whatever the initials are, but we all had exactly the same situation outside of Christ. Absolutely. We were absolutely, all of us were in just as dire restraint as a Rosaria Butterfield or your transgender friend, but God in his mercy did what? he gave you a new heart, and he gave you faith, and he opened your eyes so that you could see the glory of Christ and to see the ugliness of your own sin and the exclusiveness of salvation through the cross of Jesus Christ. And that's what happened in Rosaria's life. But, and this is understandable, we're all works of progress. In her early works, she describes some conversations that she had with a lesbian friend, and she would use whatever pronouns that particular person wanted. I've heard some folks I respect that sort of had, well, I'm not sure about Rosaria. Maybe they were referring back to those early writings. Absolutely heroic. This came out just a handful of months ago. She recognized that by equivocating on those pronouns, and I've got the article for you, it was April 9th of this year. She said, that was sin. I sinned publicly. I confess my sin publicly. I repent of my sin publicly." And she names names of those who equivocated on the truth, and she says they need to repent because they're propagating lies. And she uses the word satanic, and that's exactly right. This is absolutely heroic. It's a wonderful example, particularly those in a public setting. Folks, we all write, we all write, say things that we wish we had back, right? Okay? You have to give immense credit to a person of her stature to say, I was absolutely wrong, and I sinned publicly, and I repent publicly, and I'm calling upon others to live biblically in this world. It couldn't be more clear. But she's calling for evangelicals to stop, this is on page eight, out of a misguided sense of kindness and courtesy And she's serious about her sin. And she explains the sinfulness of acquiescing to transgender dogma and language. At the bottom of page eight, Butterfield is repentant and she names her sins. This is what she said. My use of transgender pronouns was not a mistake. It was sin. Public sin requires public repentance, not course correction. I have publicly sinned on the issue of transgender pronouns, which I have carelessly used in books and articles. I have publicly sinned by advocating for the use of transgender pronouns in interviews and public Q&As." That's bold, and that is immensely biblical. By virtue of writing from her perspective, she had the impact on countless believers about how to address folks in this ambiguous, this immoral world. And she recognized that what she had done by taking some spin off the ball was sin, and it was not biblical. So top of page nine, she talks about why is it a sin? Because using transgender pronouns is a sin against the ninth commandment. Understand, she comes from a world that is very biblically articulate. The ninth commandment is I shall not bear false witness against my neighbor. Well, if you're using transgender pronouns, you're not speaking truth, you're bearing false witness. And the 10th commandment is about coveting, and she describes the fact that coveting is, you've got this transgender person that is not comfortable with who they are, they want to be someone else, they're coveting, and by endorsing that and embracing that, you're actually encouraging them in their own sin, by coveting something that they're not, coveting an identity that God has not given them. And why is it such an issue? Six reasons. Using transgendered pronouns as a sin against the creation ordinance, Genesis 1, 26 and 27. Using transgendered pronouns as a sin against image bearing. It discourages, this is talking about the person who equivocates and uses and accommodates these pronouns. It discourages a believer's progressive sanctification and falsifies the gospel. It cheapens redemption and it tramples on the blood of Christ. It fails to love my neighbor as myself. It fails to offer genuine Christian hospitality and instead yields the definition of hospitality to liberal communitarianism, identity politics, and human flourishing. What she's saying is you can call it what you want. You can call it hospitality, but it's not hospitality. You've sold yourself out to a corrupt environment, a corrupt culture. And you've identified yourself with this notion of human flourishing. And so she takes people to task about that. She goes on to say, I once sinfully said all these things too, but this position makes no Christian sense. Does any real Christian believe crafting a relationship based on falsehood will give the gospel a better hearing? The answer is no. And is that how people are converted? The answer is no. by meeting God on sin's terms and hearing nice things about themselves. I mean, she's really speaking this very, very clearly. So, top of page 10, in her words, transgenderism is satanic. We who once promoted pronoun hospitality lent false credibility to a wolfish theology that fails to protect the sheep. Instead, it eats them alive. Gender ideology is founded on lies. What are those lies? that being a man or woman is a trivial social construct. That's what society would say. That's why there's this bifurcation between sex and gender. It's a social construct. People can really change from one sex to the other. They can't. That's a lie. Gender is separate from bodily sex. It's not. They're the same. You can split them for cultural reasons, but it's a lie. What's inside a person trumps physical reality. A person can be psychologically conflicted, but that doesn't change who they really are, that God has made. There is an infinitude of genders. There's not. I mean, I saw someone who identified as a Kali. I mean, they literally spent $14,000 to buy a Kali suit, and they're walking around in all fours. That shows you Romans 1 right there in front of us. I mean, it's ludicrous. But there's not an infinitude of genders. It also encourages people to steal, violating the eighth commandment. The eighth commandment is you shall not steal. And how is it a violation of the eighth commandment? Because a person, a man who claims to be a woman is stealing the reality of womanhood. They're not a woman. They have no, they're not entitled to call themselves a woman. They're a man, including pronouns and language that remain reserved for women, male athletes who compete against women, steal positions on teams, accomplishments, victories, and female camaraderie, and even privacy. So what do we do? Christians have to stand for the truth. We have no choice on this. So I want you to see, this is actually the article. This, what I just read you is someone referring to an article. This occurred in Reformation 21, April 9th of this year, just a few months ago. And top of page 11, she says, using transgender pronouns isn't a sin because the times have changed. Sin is sin. And the Bible defines this as sin. She goes on the next paragraph and she's referencing Joshua 7. In Joshua 7, the Israelites were told when they were to take over a particular city that they were not to take booty. They were to just completely lay it waste and not to take any of it for themselves. Achan took property for himself and he brought judgment upon the entire community that he was a part of. And ultimately, God ordained that they would be separating by tribes, and then by families, and then by heads of families, and ultimately the lot fell to him, and he was stoned to death, he and his whole family, because he had brought judgment upon the entire community by violating God's dictate not to take booty. So when she says transgender pronouns are one of the acons in the camp of broad evangelicalism, that's what she's referring to. It's bringing judgment upon the entire evangelical community when we have people compromising on the truth. It shouldn't be an aching in the camp of the confessionally reformed. And then she names names, Preston Sprinkle, Mark Yarhouse, David French, Revoice, surely you've heard of Revoice. Side B, Christianity, those are people who sort of swing both ways, I guess. In any parachurch ministry that elevates being winsome as the end game provide useful examples to defy. They nod in the direction of traditional values, but then swap biblical clarity for postmodern pluralism. thus burning to the ground any legitimate theological bridge to gospel grace." Could you be more clear than that? I can't possibly improve on this language. Transgenderism is satanic. Do you love your neighbor? Do you love your Lord? Do you believe that Jesus alone is the way, the truth, and the life? Does Jesus save us from our sins, or do we delegate this task to priests of our day, the therapists? Do you know the difference between making false friends and loving your enemies? Yes, Jesus was a friend of sinners, which means that by His precious blood He ransoms all who repent, believe, and put their trust in Him. He makes former enemies into His friends out through His blood. The blood of Christ does not create an ally with the sin it crushes on the cross, for that stands in opposition to gospel hope. The world, the flesh, and the devil are not Christ's friends. Transidentity and Jesus are not coterminous. It's one or the other. Christians need to learn how to love their enemies and not pretend that their enemies are their friends. So she goes on, but I just wanted to close with that because here's someone who came up out of a segment of this very immoral world as a lesbian and trafficked in a community where she was dealing with transgender people and For the most part, for the greatest part, what Rosaria Butterfield wrote was very solid. But where she compromised was on the use of equivocating on these pronouns and identifying with an identity that was not true. And to God's credit, to God's glory, and to recognize the maturity of another believer in Christ, she said, you know what? It wasn't a mistake. I sinned. And in my writings, I sinned publicly. And I confess publicly." And then on page 12, she says, we who have promoted this sin need to stand up and repent. I'll start. I repent. May God forgive me. Would anyone else like to join me? I can't improve on that. That's a bold, stern call for us to be biblically faithful, to speak the truth in love, to love our neighbors, ourselves. And to love our neighbor does not mean that we tell them what they want to hear. It tells them what they need to hear. But it means that we speak with words of wisdom, that we speak with words of grace. Speaking with wisdom and grace doesn't mean that we're compromising. It means we're asking, Lord, would you give me the right words to use on this occasion so that I can speak truth into someone's life that you might actually use to take them out of the domain of darkness and translate them into the kingdom of your beloved Son. And that's what happened in Rosaria Butterfield's life when a solid Reformed Presbyterian friend took her and showed hospitality, spoke truth into her life. God granted an open door for the gospel to go forth and radically transformed someone who'd been right in the hands of Satan himself. And now she's married and writing and doing good work. And that's what can happen. We can never underestimate, brothers and sisters, what can happen when we speak truth in a dark world. So I challenge myself, I challenge us all to be people who will be lights shining in the midst of a dark and perverse generation.