In a controversial social media post that has ignited intense debate online, Rev. Andrew Stehlik of Rutgers Presbyterian Church in New York City has challenged conventional interpretations of “biblical family values.” In his latest lecture, the pastor asserted that the Bible itself contains numerous examples of varied family structures—including nonmonogamous unions and same-sex relationships—that contradict the traditional narrative promoted by many conservative groups.
Stehlik, known for his progressive stance and active involvement in social causes through his church and the Peace and Social Justice Network, launched his lecture with an unapologetic tone. “When I arrived in America, I was educated in theology and anthropology in Europe,” he proclaimed. “I quickly learned that the so-called biblical family values being touted by politicians and preachers are far from the complete picture.” According to Stehlik, the Bible does not endorse a single, monolithic model of family life; instead, it reveals a rich tapestry of relationships and marriage arrangements that reflect a variety of cultural practices.
He pointed to the Hebrew scriptures, noting that polygamy was not only common but sometimes celebrated among the patriarchs. “Just consider the patriarchs and their multiple wives,” he argued, suggesting that these practices highlight an alternative understanding of marital relationships in biblical times. Stehlik went further, explaining that the Bible also features diverse forms of marriage. He mentioned that while patrilocal marriages—where the wife moves in with the husband’s family—are well documented, there are also examples of matrilocal arrangements. “For instance, in the early chapters of Genesis, the narrative hints at a model where the man leaves his family to join his wife’s household,” he explained, urging listeners to broaden their perspective on what constitutes a traditional marriage.
Perhaps most provocatively, Stehlik referenced the story of Naomi and Ruth as evidence of same-sex relationships or, at the very least, as an example of a nontraditional household structure that challenges current definitions of marriage. “When you look at Naomi and Ruth, you see a deep bond that defies our modern labels,” he claimed. “This isn’t about endorsing a new agenda, but about acknowledging the plurality of relationships that the Bible actually documents.”
In addition to discussing marriage, Stehlik brought up less commonly cited examples from biblical texts, such as the arrangements involving children born to slave surrogate mothers. “Without these unconventional unions, the very structure of the tribes of Israel would be entirely different,” he noted, emphasizing that these examples illustrate how family models have evolved over time and are far more complex than often portrayed.
Unsurprisingly, Stehlik’s post has drawn sharp reactions on social media. Many traditionalists and conservative readers were quick to express their dismay. One user remarked, “‘In the Bible’ doesn’t automatically mean it’s God-endorsed. Just because polygamy appears in the Old Testament doesn’t make it right!” Another criticized the pastor’s approach, stating, “I spit out my drink when I heard ‘Naomi and Ruth are a same-gender household.’ This is not biblical truth; it’s a personal interpretation gone too far.”
However, not all reactions were negative. Supporters of Stehlik praised his willingness to challenge conventional wisdom. “We need more voices that question the dominant narrative,” one admirer commented. “It’s refreshing to see someone dive into the scriptures and point out that the Bible has room for diverse family models.” Others saw his lecture as an invitation to reexamine how religious texts are used to justify modern social policies. “If the Bible shows that relationships have always been diverse, then maybe it’s time to rethink what ‘biblical family values’ really means,” wrote another social media user.
Stehlik’s arguments come at a time when the debate over LGBTQ rights and family structures is at the forefront of cultural and political discourse. His progressive perspective is part of a broader movement within some faith communities to reconcile traditional religious texts with contemporary values of inclusivity and equality. His church, Rutgers Presbyterian, is known for its involvement in various social justice initiatives, from organizing community forums and participating in local demonstrations to supporting national movements like Pride parades and climate marches.
Critics, however, accuse Stehlik of twisting biblical texts to suit a modern political agenda. They argue that his interpretations ignore the historical and cultural contexts in which these scriptures were written. “The Bible reflects the values of its time, not a blueprint for today’s society,” one critic argued. “We can’t simply pick and choose parts of scripture to support our current views without considering the full context.”
Despite the backlash, Stehlik remains resolute in his position. He asserts that the true message of the Bible is one of diversity and inclusion, and that modern interpretations should reflect the complex reality of human relationships. “We must acknowledge that the Bible is not a monolithic text,” he insists. “It presents a variety of relationship models, and recognizing that diversity can only enrich our understanding of faith.”
As debates over the interpretation of biblical texts continue to evolve, Stehlik’s controversial lecture is likely to fuel further discussion within both religious and secular communities. Whether one views his arguments as groundbreaking or misguided, his challenge to conventional biblical family values underscores the ongoing struggle to align ancient texts with modern societal norms.
