Megan Basham, in her new book Shepherds for Sale, was right to be critical of the views on sexuality and homosexuality presented by Rev. J. D. Greear, who is Neil Shenvi’s pastor (note: Neil has attempted to take Meg to task over her statements about Greear) at The Summit Church in Durham, North Carolina and president of the Southern Baptist Convention from 2018 to 2021.
The 2019 Sermon Controversy
Greear tried to diminish the significance of the issue of sexual ethics in general and homosexual practice in particular in a 2019 sermon. Then when a furor arose, he issued a correction that left many erroneous views intact and largely blamed others for misrepresenting him.
His slippery attempts at rescuing himself from critique in the SBC in this matter (another was his initial endorsement of Preston Sprinkle’s erroneous “transgender pronoun hospitality”) have a Clintonesque quality in which every sentence must be carefully parsed.
The “Whisper” Statement
Greear declared in a widely publicized sermon in Jan. 2019 that the Bible only “whispers about sexual sin,” with homosexual practice especially in view, while it shouts about “materialism and religious pride.”
Much controversy erupted over this wrongheaded claim, leading Greear two-and-a-half years later (June 26, 2021) to issue “A Statement about My Sermon on Romans 1” which some took as an apology for his previous remark. A careful read of the statement, however, shows that Greear ended up more blaming those whom he alleged “misrepresented” him, perhaps intentionally, than apologizing and correcting his errors.
What Greear had said in the 2019 sermon (among other missteps) was this:
“In terms of frequency of [Paul’s] mention and the passion with which he mentions it, it would appear that quite a few other sins are more egregious in God’s eyes than homosexuality. Jen Wilkin, who is one of our favorite Bible teachers here and who is actually leading our Women’s Conference, said, ‘We ought to whisper about what the Bible whispers about and shout about what the Bible shouts about.’ And the Bible appears more to whisper when it comes to sexual sin compared to its shout about materialism and religious pride. In fact, Jesus not one time ever said that it was difficult for the same-sex attracted to go to heaven. He did say that it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than it was for a religiously proud or materially successful person to enter into the kingdom of God.”
2021 Clarification
Greear’s “clarification” in 2021 was not entirely successful. He stated:
“I applied that quote to the difference in the emphasis Jesus places on the dangers of pride and greed versus sexual sin and said that given the sheer number of times Jesus talks about pride and greed, it is as if he saved most of his volume to warn about pride and greed. Thus, I said, we should look more fearfully at our own prideful, greedy hearts than we do haughtily at the sexual dysfunctions of others. The key word in the point was ‘compared.’ ‘Compared to what he said about pride and greed… it is as if he shouts about… and whispers about.’
“It was a rather clumsy way of making the point. However, I was in no way trying to imply that sexual ethics are muted in Scripture, that we should not speak clearly about them, or that we should [not?] be embarrassed by them. The preceding point of that message, in fact, which was not included in the clips that got passed around, makes that abundantly clear. In that point, I state plainly Scripture could not be clearer about these matters and that rebellion in sexual sin, as 1 Cor 6:9–11 states in no uncertain terms, is a matter of eternal destiny.”
Persisting Misconceptions
As we shall see, Greear was still wrong about important things: (1) Determining the severity of a given sin by counting up the number of explicit mentions in the Bible; and (2) contending that the universal struggle with pride and materialism is worse than engaging in homosexual practice.
Moreover, (3) his claim in 2021 that he presented “rebellion in sexual sin” in that 2019 sermon as “a matter of eternal destiny” is at conflict with that sermon where he denied that homosexual practice could send someone to hell and depicted homosexual practice as no worse than any other sin, including an outburst of temper, a feeling of envy or greed, a boast, or a rebellious attitude toward one’s parents.
He apologized “for any confusion that my clumsy wording may have caused” but devoted the rest of his comments to blaming others for misrepresenting him and did not rule out that the misrepresentation may have been intentional. In the end, his statement was more about those misrepresenting him than about what he stated, which was not merely “clumsy” but also incorrect on its face.
Response to Criticism
At one point, he blamed “Tom Ascol and a few of the same pastors seemingly looking to trap me in my words” for not reaching “out to me for clarification.” It was Tom’s Founders Ministries that produced the video in which I had a short appearance addressing the “whisper” statement.
Let it be said that I sent Rev. Greear an email on June 11, 2019, regarding my assessment of the entire sermon in question, stating: “I have written an open letter to you that appears on my Facebook and may soon be appearing elsewhere. For the moment you can view it at [then supplied the Facebook link].” I left not only my email address but also my cell phone. If he had had any issue with what I wrote, he could easily have contacted me. He never did.
Here were my observations in a 2021 post (modified slightly to adjust tenses for a 2024 reissuing) on Greear’s 2021 statement and on his 2019 sermon.
1. Jesus’ Silence on Same-Sex Attraction
Let’s begin by looking at Greear’s claim in his 2019 sermon that “Jesus not one time ever said that it was difficult for the same-sex attracted to go to heaven.” We wouldn’t expect Jesus to address “the same-sex attracted” specifically since homosexual practice was not an issue among the Jews of Jesus’ day. Nor would we expect him to condemn people for experiencing (but not acquiescing to) an involuntary impulse.
What Jesus did do is warn that sexual sin could get you thrown into hell. Matthew placed the Jesus saying about tearing out one’s eye or cutting off one’s hand if it threatens one’s downfall between Jesus’ prohibition of adultery of the heart and remarriage after (at least invalid) divorce, offenses that he obviously didn’t regard as severe as the violation of the male-female prerequisite that he treated as the foundation of sexual ethics (5:27-32; cp. 19:4-6). Granted, he didn’t use the precise expression “eye of a needle” here but that is a pedantic, not substantive, point.
2. Misguided Hermeneutics
In his 2021 statement, Greear still operated with the erroneous hermeneutical premise that the severity of sins is determined by the number of mentions that they get by Jesus or by the Bible generally. He reiterates:
“I applied that quote to the difference in the emphasis Jesus places on the dangers of pride and greed versus sexual sin and said that given the sheer number of times Jesus talks about pride and greed, it is as if he saved most of his volume to warn about pride and greed.”
In his sermon, he also made the same point about the apostle Paul.
Counting often gets the interpreter to the wrong conclusion. Some sexual sins are so egregious and corrupting to the young, and thus so infrequently committed in Israel by Jews, that the very mention of them in Scripture is kept to a minimum
In general, Israel as a nation could not be compared to the profligacy of the Gentile world as regards severe sexual sin. On homosexual practice in Israel, later rabbis could say: “Israel is not suspected.” What possible motivation would Jesus have to harp on homosexual practice (or incest, or bestiality) if no one was known to be engaging in such activity, much less advocating for it?
The witness of the Hebrew Bible as to the severity of such sexual sins is already clear. Instead, Jesus focused on residual problems or remaining loopholes: adultery (including of the heart) and the male right of unilateral divorce for any cause.
3. Rebellion in Sexual Sin and Eternal Destiny
Greear in his 2021 statement insisted that he indicated in his sermon that sexual sin is severe: “I state plainly Scripture could not be clearer … that rebellion in sexual sin, as 1 Cor 6:9–10 states in no uncertain terms, is a matter of eternal destiny.” Yet how did this new statement square with the claim that he made in his 2019 sermon that “homosexuality [sic: homosexual practice] does not send you to hell”?
Clearly, Paul was warning self-professed believers in 1 Cor 6:9-10 engaged in severe sexual immorality of the exact opposite. The besetting issue in the second half of ch. 6 is still the self-professed Christian in ch. 5 who is in a sexual relationship with his stepmother. Paul insists that such a one will not inherit the kingdom of God if he persists in his behavior, nor will serial-unrepentant adulterers, men who have sex with males, “soft men” who emasculate themselves to attract male sex partners, and men who have sex with prostitutes, irrespective of what they confess about Jesus.
While we can’t merit our salvation, we can be excluded from God’s kingdom based on deeds that reflect a life not transformed by true faith.
Greear added:
“Here’s how I know that [homosexual practice doesn’t send you to hell]: Being heterosexual doesn’t send you to heaven.”
This line is plagiarized (though unacknowledged) from Tim Keller. The logic doesn’t follow. The fact that doing good deeds doesn’t get one into heaven doesn’t establish that doing bad deeds doesn’t send one to hell (there are NT texts that indicate the latter, including 1 Cor 6:9-10). He presumably wouldn’t argue: “Domestic violence doesn’t get you thrown into jail. I know that because the absence of domestic violence doesn’t get you a reward or establish that you are a great spouse.”
4. Downplaying the Severity of Homosexual Sin
Greear did once cite 1 Cor 6:9-10 in his 2019 sermon, but only to reject the weakened claim that “God doesn’t care about” homosexual sin. He then goes on to diminish the severity of homosexual sin by arguing that it is not “the worst sin.”
Indeed, in his misreading of the extended vice list in Romans 1:18-32, Greear claimed in his 2019 sermon that “homosexuality [sic: homosexual practice] is “simply one corruption among many” and no more “depraved” than “deceit and boasting,” “greed,” “outbursts of temper,” “envy,” “materialism,” and having “a rebellious attitude toward your parents.”
What Greear misunderstands is that, while Paul is indicating to the imaginary Jewish dialogue partner that any sin can send one to hell if personal merit is the means of salvation, he is not asserting that idolatry, homosexual practice, and murder are no more severe in their sinfulness than a mere passing “attitude” of rebellion toward one’s parents, greed, deceit, or pride. This should be obvious.
The fact that any sin can exclude someone from the Kingdom of God if personal merit is the means of salvation does not mean all sin is equal in all respects. A good health care plan should cover all injuries equally but that doesn’t mean that all injuries are equal.
5. Severity of Homosexual Practice in Scripture
I have argued from many lines of evidence in Scripture that homosexual practice is viewed as the most severe sexual sin committed between consenting adults. For example, the first and foundational sexual distinction in Genesis is the creation of male and female. Jesus used the sexual binary, required for marriage, as the basis for limiting the number of partners in a sexual union to two. Homosexual practice is an assault on the very foundation of sexual ethics inasmuch as it rejects any significance to union between sexual counterparts. Leviticus 20 lists man-male intercourse among first-tier sexual sins. The stories of Sodom and the Levite at Gibeah are treated in Scripture as classic instances of depravity and destruction in large part because of the attempt of males to have sex with males.
Can you imagine Greear arguing that having sex with one’s parent is no more severe than an occasional attitude of pride, greed, or rebellion against one’s parents? He wouldn’t, because Christians rightly recognize such an argument to be perverse.
Yet, according to Greear in his 2019 sermon, having wealth or being religiously prideful is worse than engaging in serial unrepentant homosexual practice. He attributes that conclusion to Jesus but that is not what Jesus was contending. Jesus had in mind great abuses, not any instance of wealth or pride.
6. Severity of Homosexual Practice in Scripture
Greear reiterated this message in his 2021 statement: “We should look more fearfully at our own prideful, greedy hearts than we do haughtily at the sexual dysfunctions of others.”
I agree that when reproving others we should always have in view our own sins. But that doesn’t mean that the daily struggle against pride and greed in ourselves should register greater horror than another man’s sex with his mother, two or more persons concurrently, or someone of the same sex.
I am quite sure that if one of Greear’s parishioners were discovered to be in a sexual relationship with a parent or child, or a fellow minister to be engaging in sexual abuse, he wouldn’t have greater horror at his own “prideful, greedy heart.” In fact, his advocacy as SBC President indicated that he places sexual abuse by a church officer to be a high offense far exceeding religious pride and materialism.
Not only is it bad exegesis and bad logic to make unrepentant homosexual practice less severe than feelings of pride or possession of wealth, akin to an act of disobeying one’s parents, but it is also bad pastoral theology. In the story of the sinful woman who washed Jesus’ feet with her tears, wiped his feet with her hair, and kissed them with her lips, Jesus explained to the Pharisaic host that the one who was forgiven more, loves more (Luke 7:36-50). One doesn’t have to lower the severity of sin in order to reach out to an offender. In fact, the greater the need, the greater should be the loving outreach.
7. Advocacy for LGBTQ Rights and Its Implications
In his 2019 sermon, Greear contended that Evangelicals should “stand against any [LGBT] discrimination” and should “count ourselves among the fiercest advocates for the preservation of their dignity and rights.” Expressed in this unqualified way, it sounds like he was urging Evangelicals to support “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” so-called “non-discrimination” laws. Such laws have been used in local and state venues, and (if Democrats have their way) will be used on a national level, to beat every Evangelical in America and destroy our civil and religious liberties.
The kind of “rights,” “dignity, and respect” demanded by “LGBTQ” advocates include “drag queen story hour” for children, mandatory “LGBTQ” indoctrination in schools and at work in order to achieve a “safe” environment, requiring people to contribute their professional talents directly in support of “gay weddings” and men dressing like women, and putting men who claim to be a woman in women’s restrooms, locker rooms, and sports.
8. Previous Missteps in Addressing Homosexuality
Greear’s missteps in his 2019 sermon are related to previous missteps. In a keynote presentation at the 2014 ERLC National Conference on “The Gospel, Homosexuality, and the Future of Marriage,” Greear said that “we have to love our gay neighbor more than we love our position on sexual morality,” as if love and truth were a zero-sum game where love increases only as truth decreases. We can’t truly love anyone by discarding the commands of God.
At the same event, Greear said that we should not “stigmatize sexual sin,” claiming that such action “shows extreme ignorance of the gospel.” He added that the church should not put “sexual ethics … at the center of Christianity.” Again, presumably, he would never make the same remarks in connection with the mistreatment of women or racism. To do so would undermine the church’s resistance to matters of genuine concern in the church and society at large.
The male-female foundation of marriage is anything but a peripheral matter in Scripture. It is established from creation and made the basis by Jesus for extrapolating other principles in sexual ethics like the limitation of two persons to a sexual union (monogamy). In our culture, we don’t need less stigmatizing of sexual sin in society. We need more.
I am glad too Rev. Greear wants to love persons who experience homosexual impulses and even engage in homosexual practice. Nothing I have said here should diminish that love. Jesus reached out in love to the biggest economic exploiters of his day (tax collectors) while intensifying God’s demand for economic justice. Likewise, he pursued sexual sinners while intensifying God’s demand for sexual purity and warning of eternal consequences for those who did not repent.
9. Pronoun Hospitality
In Nov. 2019 Greear encouraged faithful Christians to adopt “pronoun hospitality” (ugh) to “transgender” persons based on so-called “generosity of spirit” (like Brian McLaren’s so-called “generous orthodoxy”?) in addressing “transgender” persons by their delusional pretend sex.
“If a transgender person came into our church, came into my life, I think my disposition would be to refer to them by their preferred pronoun. When we want to talk about gender I will be clear with them on the truth. The question is ‘Is that the battlefront that you want to choose?’ . . . Preston Sprinkle has some good thoughts on this. . . . ‘Pronoun hospitality’ is the way that I would lean in this. . . . [If you can,] use the name that they have chosen for themselves and avoid using personal pronouns altogether.”
The idea that Jesus or Paul would ever have referred to a man as a woman or a woman as a man in anything other than satire or derision for abhorrent behavior is absurd revisionism in the extreme. It is not an act of “hospitality” or “respect” to the offender to use fake pronouns and proper names but rather (1) a scandal to the “weak” and young in the church and a rightful violation of conscience that will lead many to stumble to their ruin; (2) an accommodation to sin that God finds utterly abhorrent, to say nothing of the fact that it is an egregious lie; and (3) a complicity in the offender’s self-dishonoring, self-degrading, and self-demeaning behavior that does him or her (and the grieving ex-spouse and children, if there are any) no favor because it can get the person in question excluded from the kingdom of God.
10. Clarifying Greer’s Position
It is important to be clear that I am not arguing that Greear is supporting homosexual sex or transgenderism. He regards them as sin. No one could be elected SBC president while advocating approval for such behaviors. What I contend is that he espouses some views that grease the slope that leads to a denomination eventually supporting committed homosexual unions and transgenderism. SBC Presidents should know better; they are called to a higher standard.
Megan Basham is right to see a creeping dilution of the biblical witness on sexual ethics in the past preaching and teaching of J. D. Greear.
