Does JD Greear Still Believe the Bible Whispers About Sexual Sin?

The following is a loose transcript of a response given on the WWUTT podcast, episode 2225, answering a question about an apology recently given by J.D. Greear, pastor of the Summit Church in Durham, NC, and former president of the Southern Baptist Convention. You can listen to the episode by clicking here.

Dear Pastor Gabe

Years ago, I had seen a video you had done in which you highlighted a portion of a sermon from JD Greear who said that God “whispers” about sexual sin. You also preached in a sermon on Romans 1 that a former Southern Baptist Convention president had said that the Bible whispers about sexual sin.

Have you seen that Greear has actually apologized for this comment? He has said that his wording was careless and he would not preach it the same way again. Would this have an affect on your videos highlighting Greear’s mistaken teaching? Would you at least be willing to post a disclaimer in the description of the video and maybe a link to where Greear apologized?

I hope that we in the body of Christ are willing to accept these kinds of apologies and extend God’s grace when a pastor is willing to admit he erred.

Johnny
Greensboro, NC

Thank you for your e-mail, Johnny. I agree that when a pastor is willing to apologize over something that he preached in error, we should be willing to forgive. I’ve said wrong things before (nothing this big, to the best of my knowledge), and I’ve apologized and made the correction where needed.

However, when you listen to Greear’s sermon and read his apology, the explanation of his error doesn’t match what he preached. He claims his error was a matter of careless wording, but it was significantly more serious than that—it was false teaching. It’s false teaching he has preached before, and he has not repented of.

Johnny shared a link to An Open Response to Megan Basham’s “Shepherds for Sale,” which J.D. Greear posted to his website on Monday. Shepherds for Sale is now a New York Times bestseller, exposing how many big evangelical leaders have traded the truth for a Leftist agenda. Megan mentions how Greear has downplayed the sin of homosexuality in his preaching, citing his infamous comment that the Bible “whispers” about sexual sin.

Greear has done this kind of softening several times. It seems that he cannot address this topic without apologizing to “the gay community” and heaping guilt upon the church. The first time I heard him do this was in a sermon he gave 10 years ago at a conference put on by the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. That sermon has since been deleted, but many snippets of it still exist. Like this one:

“Jesus-representing churches will be known as the friends of the LGBTQ-community. Now I think the question given to us as church leaders: Have you drawn the gay and lesbian community close? Are you an advocate against abuse, injustice, and discrimination on their behalf? Isn’t that what you would do for a friend? I do want to apologize to the gay and lesbian community on behalf of my community and me for not standing up against abuse and discrimination directed toward you. That was wrong, and we need your forgiveness.”

How exactly are church leaders to draw “the gay and lesbian community close”? What does that mean? One way, Greear says, is that we become advocates “against abuse, injustice, and discrimination on their behalf.” Okay, what does that look like? What instances of abuse, injustice, and discrimination does he have in mind?

When he says, “I do want to apologize to the gay and lesbian community on behalf of my community and me for not standing up against abuse and discrimination directed toward you,” what occasion of abuse or discrimination is he talking about? What community is he apologizing for? When he says that even he has not stood up against abuse and discrimination directed at gays and lesbians, when has he failed to do this? Does he need to be disciplined? Does he need to step down?

This is called posturing, which is behavior intended to impress or mislead. It doesn’t actually mean anything. No one does this with any other sin—who apologizes to the adultery community or the pedophile community or the racist community? I’ve called Greear out on posturing before, when I critiqued the sermon he preached at the Southern Baptist Convention Annual Meeting in Nashville in 2021. This is his shtick. Many are fooled into thinking apologies like this are sincere.

While Greear might be a master at posturing, he is terrible at apologizing. In his “open response,” all Greear apologized for was poor wording. He has not apologized for his terrible theology and bad application, like when he said in a 2019 sermon that the Bible whispers about sexual sin (and then the same sermon was preached by Ed Litton, which I’ll come back to). His preaching has been a burden on the church and on those who still continue in this sin.

Consider the following three characteristics as we examine his apology: First, he shifts the blame; Second, he’s dishonest in the way he frames what he said; Third, he re-affirms that everything he said was true, just not that way he said it. So he still thinks the Bible “whispers” about sexual sin; he just wouldn’t use that word again.

In Shepherds for Sale, pg. 227, Megan wrote the following:

“Though he reversed his position after two years of push-back, North Carolina megachurch pastor J.D. Greear, while president of the Southern Baptist Convention, encouraged his congregation to minimize speaking about sexual sins like homosexuality, saying they should not ‘shout about what the Bible whispers about’—as if the destruction of Sodom and Paul’s description in Romans 1 of the progressions of societal depravity were mere murmurs.”

Greear responded to this:

“First, I have not changed my position on homosexuality or changed how I encouraged our congregation to engage with it. Multiple streams of evidence show that. I used a poor choice of words that allowed my meaning to be misconstrued, especially when those words were lifted out of context of the rest of the message.”

Does that sound like an admission of error? “I used a poor choice of words that allowed my meaning to be misconstrued,” by other people, not by him, “especially when those words were lifted out of context of the rest of the marriage.” This is like saying, “See, I didn’t preach anything wrong; it’s those people who made this into something it’s not.”

The sermon in question was entitled How the Fall Affects Us All, preached at the Summit Church in Durham, NC, on January 27, 2019. The text that Greear covered was Romans 1:24-32. About 10 minutes into the sermon, he read verses 26-27 which say:

“For this reason, God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.”

Greear then said:

“Now this is the longest and the clearest passage in the Bible on homosexuality. And let me just go ahead and acknowledge right up front here, I know, I know that historically we in the church have not done a great job in talking about this, and maybe even a worse job in caring for those who are going through this. But let’s begin by at least looking humbly and open-mindedly at what God’s word says about this, and then afterwards we’ll talk about what that means for those of us who are seeking to follow Jesus.”

This is the lead-in to Greear’s exposition of Romans 1:26-27, which he opens by accusing the church of not caring for homosexuals. In his response to Megan, he said that his comments were lifted out of context. But when I look at the context, he hit harder against the church and pulled the punch of what the passage is actually addressing.

Continuing his response to Megan, Greear says, “When it became clear that people outside of our church thought I was minimizing or denying the sinfulness of homosexuality, I took responsibility for my failure in communication and clarified my position.”

Greear will not say he preached something wrong. He only says that he was unclear. The people in his church knew what he meant, he says, but people outside of his congregation “thought I was minimizing or denying the sinfulness of homosexuality.” This apology has the persona of someone who says, “I’m sorry if you were offended.” That’s not an apology.

If you’re going to say, “I’m sorry if I offended you,” save it. You’re not sorry for anything. Apologize for doing something wrong, not for someone else’s emotional reaction to what you did. Nothing in Greear’s apology acknowledges his teaching was wrong. Greear continues:

“The sermon in question did not minimize speaking about the sin of homosexuality, mute homosexuality’s sinfulness, or encourage our congregation to do so (if you listen to the sermon you will hear that it refers at least seven times to homosexuality’s sinfulness). Just before the section of the sermon Basham pulled from, I had quoted in full Paul’s warning from 1 Corinthians 6:9–11 that those embracing or practicing homosexuality would not inherit the kingdom of God, and just after it I told gay and lesbian people that to go to heaven they must repent and be born again, which I said meant they must say something to God like:

“‘God, I’m sorry for elevating my desires over your will. I’m sorry for attempting to define my identity apart from your design for me. I’m sorry for taking on myself the authority to declare what’s good. I’m sorry for seeking satisfaction in self-fulfillment rather than from giving glory to you. I recognize Jesus is Lord and turn over control to him.'”

Now, I acknowledge that Greear said in that sermon that homosexuality is sin that will keep a person from the kingdom of God. I acknowledged that in 2019, the first time I critiqued this sermon. But that did not have the emphasis he’s insisting he had. He made it sound like homosexuality is a sin that the Bible doesn’t speak that much about, and it is not as serious as other sins.

You cannot preach this both ways. If Scripture says that the sexually immoral, adulterers, idolaters, homosexuals, and the effeminate will not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9-10), that should not be downplayed. But Greear downplayed it, saying that the Bible whispers about sexual sin—not just homosexual sin, but all sexual sin.

Can you imagine someone attending Summit Church that day, struggling with the hurt of having been sexually abused, and they hear their pastor say that the Bible whispers about sexual sin? Ironically and tragically, it was just two weeks after this sermon that the Houston Chronicle story broke, exposing instances of sexual abuse in Southern Baptist churches. And here was the president of the Southern Baptist Convention having just preached two weeks before that the Bible whispers about sexual sin.

How embarrassing. It is astonishing that Greear’s church did not hold him accountable for this false teaching. Did not even one of his elders confront him afterward and say, “Dude, what in the world was that?” I’m guessing not, because it took him two years to address it, and only when the “whispers” comment blew open a plagiarism scandal with his name on it.

Greear goes on:

“In using ‘whisper’ I was making a comparison with how Jesus talked about pride and religious hypocrisy versus how he talked with those He encountered in sexual sin (i.e., compare His tone in Matthew 23 with the tone of His conversations in John 4 and John 8). I was attempting to show that whenever Jesus dealt with someone in sexual sin in the Gospels, He spoke to them up close, with tenderness, as individuals with stories, even as He made clear their sin to them. In the sermon itself, in the statements that immediately followed, that is exactly how I contextualized what I meant by ‘whispers.'”

That is not true. This is the place that most exposes the faultiness in Greear’s so-called apology. Is Greear being deceptive, or does he not properly recall the content of his own sermon? Either way, this is dishonest. His “whispers” comment was not about tone but about frequency and degree of seriousness. Remember, he’s blaming Megan and the rest of us for lifting his comment out of context, but it’s actually Greear who’s lifting his own comment out of context.

See for yourself. Greear linked to the transcript of his 2019 sermon. I copied what he actually said from the video word-for-word so you can see the “whispers” comment as it was made:

“I mean, in terms of frequency of mention or the passion with which Paul talks about it, it would appear that quite a few other sins are more egregious in God’s eyes than homosexuality. Jen Wilkin, who’s one of our favorite Bible teachers here and who’s actually leading our women’s conference, she says we ought to whisper about what the Bible whispers about, and we ought to shout about what it shouts about. And the Bible appears more to whisper when it comes to sexual sin compared to its shouts about materialism and religious pride.

“Throughout Jesus’ ministry and His life, we see Him demonstrating great, just incredible sympathy for those caught in sexual sin and great animosity toward the religiously proud. In fact, Jesus not one time ever said that it was difficult for the same-sex attracted to go to heaven; He did say it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a religiously proud or materialistically successful person to enter into the kingdom of God. That is not to say that same-sex behavior is not sinful—just to say that we often present it differently than the Bible does.”

Notice that his “whisper” line was not about Jesus’ tone, but about “frequency of mention” in the Bible. (Even if I could be convinced that Greear’s “whisper” line was about tone, it’s still a really stupid comment. Remember the context: Greear said the Bible whispers about sexual sin while preaching from Romans 1:24-32. The Bible does anything but whisper about sexual sin in Romans 1. This may be the worst line of commentary I have ever heard anyone say preaching through the book of Romans.)

Let me set frequency aside for a moment and take Greear up on comparing Jesus’ tone with the religiously proud versus the sexually immoral. I’ll go to a passage he just referenced: Jesus’ confrontation with the Rich Young Ruler in Mark 10. This is where Jesus said it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. Here’s the exchange in verses 17-22:

And as He was setting out on His journey, a man ran up and knelt before Him and asked Him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone. You know the commandments: ‘Do not murder, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother.'”

And he said to Him, “Teacher, all these I have kept from my youth!”

And Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, “You lack one thing: go, sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”

Disheartened by the saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.

Does it look there like Jesus shouted at this religiously proud young man? Did He issue angry rebukes? No. In fact, Mark recalls, “Jesus, looking at him, loved him,” enough to tell him the truth.

To His disciples, Jesus said, “How difficult it will be for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God… It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.” (Greear added to Jesus’ words, saying that it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a religiously proud person to get to heaven, but I digress.)

In citing that reference and putting it in the context he did, does Greear mean to imply that Jesus would say it is easier for a sexually immoral person to go to heaven than for a rich person? Does Greear think the sexually immoral are not among the religiously proud? Who can even glance at the LGBTQ+ agenda and not associate it with pride? It is literally the slogan of their movement—PRIDE—which they flaunt with religious fervor.

Religious pride and sexual immorality are frequent bed-fellows. In fact, there happens to be a passage where Jesus issues a harsh rebuke toward the sexually immoral, who also happen to be religiously proud. Consider Revelation 2:18-23, where we read the following:

“And to the angel of the church in Thyatira write: The words of the Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and whose feet are like burnished bronze. I know your works, your love and faith and service and patient endurance, and that your latter works exceed the first.

“But I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her sexual immorality. Behold, I will throw her onto a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her I will throw into great tribulation, unless they repent of her works, and I will strike her children dead. And all the churches will know that I am He who searches mind and heart, and I will give to each of you according to your works.”

So it turns out Jesus is no more soft on the sexually immoral than He is toward the religiously proud. Jesus was not disapproving of fire and brimstone reigning down on Sodom and Gomorrah, nor was He absent. He has judged this sin before with fire, and He will do it again (see 2 Peter 2:6 and Jude 1:7).

It is not compassionate to say the Bible “whispers” about this, in whatever form or wording that teaching may take. It is necessary for the sexually immoral to see the seriousness of their sin and what they they will receive for it, so they will fear God and repent. Salvation is only by faith in Jesus Christ, who gives new life and cleanses us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9). Even to the sexually immoral, Jesus has compassion and says, “Go and sin no more” (John 8:11).

While in his open response, Greear says his “whisper” comment was about tone, in the sermon he framed it in the context of “frequency of mention.” Author Thomas Coutouzis pointed out that this manner of diminishing the seriousness of homosexuality based on how infrequently it appears in the Bible originates with Jim Wallis, founder of Sojourners Magazine. Wallis had once shown that the word “poor” appears over 1500 times in the Scripture, but homosexuality is mentioned only 7 times.

“His conclusion,” Coutouzis said, was that “Christians must be more concerned about the poor and less concerned about homosexuality. The origination of this thought came from the progressive movement, and Wilkin and Greear swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.”

So in answer to Johnny’s question, I tell you what—how about I link to this article in the description of my videos, and people can decide for themselves? But I hope they will recognize that Greear’s apology falls short after he shifted blame, he did not properly frame his original comment, and he re-affirmed that everything he preached was right, just not the way he said it. Again, either he’s being deceptive about what he said, or he doesn’t remember what he said. And the latter is a real possibility.

In the summer of 21, newly elected president of the SBC, Ed Litton, Greear’s successor, was exposed for plagiarism. It was first discovered that Litton had lifted Greear’s sermon on Romans 1:24-32 almost word for word. Then it turned out Litton had plagiarized dozens of sermons from Greear and from other preachers as well.

It was said of me by someone else that I was at the tip of the spear in exposing Litton’s plagiarism. It started when I played a short clip of Litton saying that the Bible whispers about sexual sin, just as Greear had preached a couple of years before. A listener then sent me a video showing that Litton had actually plagiarized the entire sermon, which I shared on my Twitter account (I lost that post after I was banned from Twitter in the summer of 22).

From then on, many other online sleuths discovered that Litton’s plagiarism was kleptomaniac levels of compulsion. Over a hundred sermons were deleted from his church’s website. The cover-up was on. In less than 48 hours, a single few-second clip had blown open a full-fledged scandal. The term Littonizing was coined, used to describe a preacher who rips off his sermons.

Litton got all the attention, but Greear was forced to comment on his role in the whole thing (it was in that same address that Greear first walked-back the comment he made about the Bible whispering about sexual sin). Greear said that he had given permission to Litton to use his sermons. That satisfied a few people to let Greear off the hook. But what if Greear was just as guilty as Litton?

While the scandal was unfolding, it was discovered that Greear had endorsed a company called Docent Group. Presently on their website, Docent says that they will “custom create—from scratch—content for busy pastors: sermon research, congregational surveys, small group, discipleship,” etc. We know from people who have worked for Docent and utilized their material that “sermon research” may consist of providing sermon manuscripts and even entire sermon series.

Jed Ostoich, who used to write for Docent, did an interview with Presbycast about the ghostwriters megachurch pastors will use to write their books and sermons. Disqualified pastor Mark Driscoll published books with huge swaths of material written by guys at Docent. If it felt like Driscoll’s books were disjointed and inconsistent, Ostoich said, that’s because they were—with a different guy writing a different chapter, and Driscoll presented their words as his own.

Almost as soon as someone noticed that J.D. Greear’s personal endorsement was posted on Docent’s website, that endorsement disappeared. Why? What is the possibility that Litton didn’t actually copy Greear’s sermon, but he got the same sermon from the same source that Greear had used? Maybe to prevent that scandal from getting bigger and exposing more pastors as plagiarizers (which would also hurt Docent), Greear’s endorsement was taken down, and everyone let Litton be the fall guy.

I cannot prove this, of course. It’s just a theory, but it’s plausible. And this is why I say Greear might not actually remember what he preached and how he preached it because he didn’t write it. With her book, Megan has not only exposed these Shepherds for Sale, but their reactions to her book also show they don’t possess an ounce of humility.

I’ve been preaching lately from Titus, and it’s in chapter 1 where the Apostle Paul lists qualifications for pastors: “An overseer, as God’s steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered, or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined.

“He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it” (Titus 1:5-9).