Jonathan Merritt is a popular author and progressive gay Christian. He’s also the son of Dr. James Merritt, former president of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), which opposes same-sex marriage. Yet on Thursday, Jonathan posted a thread on X, formerly Twitter, sharing how he and his father maintain a close relationship despite theological differences.
“People often ask me how in the world I maintain a close relationship with my dad,” Jonathan posted. “I’m a progressive gay man, and as many of you know, he is a Southern Baptist preacher who describes himself as ‘to the right of Ronald Reagan.’”
People often ask me how in the world I maintain a close relationship with my dad. I’m a progressive gay man, and as many of you know, he is a Southern Baptist preacher who describes himself as “to the right of Ronald Reagan.” 🧵 pic.twitter.com/VZNe4Xd5jr
—Jonathan Merritt (@JonathanMerritt) September 28, 2023
James, along with having served as the president of the largest Protestant denomination in the United States, is the senior pastor of Iglesia de Cross Pointe in Duluth, Georgia. He also is the featured speaker for Touching Lives, a nationwide television ministry.
“These days, you can score a lot of likes on social media by posting about the people you’ve bravely severed from your life—problematic parents, snarky siblings, catty childhood friends,” Jonathan explained. “But in this age of ‘going no contact,’ my dad and I have chosen another, harder path. We’ve chosen to stay and stick it out and learn to love across difference.”
Like his father, jonathan is a popular writer on issues of faith and culture. He regularly contributes to The Atlantic, USA Today, The New York Times, USA Today, and Christianity Today, among others.
Your tax-deductible gift helps our journalists report the truth and hold Christian leaders and organizations accountable. Give a gift of $30 or more to The Roys Report this month, and you will receive a copy of “Baptistland: A Memoir of Abuse, Betrayal, and Transformation” by Christa Brown. To donate, haga clic aquí.
Jonathan said while he and his father have worked to establish healthy boundaries, they are more focused on how “we can build BRIDGES TO each other than BARRIERS FROM each other,” he said.
However, this doesn’t mean their father-son relationship has come easily. Jonathan told his nearly 68,000 followers “It’s been one of the toughest things—I cannot emphasize this enough—I’ve done in my four decades of living. We disagree on a lot politically and theologically. A LOT. We often joke that some of our disagreements could peel paint off the walls.”
Despite this, Jonathan shared some of the “wonderful truths” that their relationship has taught them both.
He said they have learned it’s impossible to love someone when you’re trying to change who they are. Along with this, he wrote that while they may occasionally fight with each other in private, they can still fight for each other in public.
“Most of all, we have learned that loving across difference is messy and difficult, but in this case, it’s worth it,” Jonathan added.
He shared that last week, at an unnamed event, he and his dad spoke publicly about these lessons with hundreds of pastors.
“If more people were willing to learn the spiritual practice of ‘loving across difference,’ I think our coarse-edged world might become a gentler, kinder, more hospitable place for all of us,” Jonathan concluded.
While James hasn’t responded to Jonathan’s post on social media, he did correo on X that same Thursday, sharing the verse I Corinthians 16:9 as a “reminder to all who serve the Lord: when God opens a door of opportunity to bless you, Satan opens up a window of opposition to blast you. Stay the course,” he said.
In 2021, the elder Merritt resigned as a visiting professor at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary over controversy sparked by his decision to share a sermon online by his son, El Informe Roys (TRR) previamente reportado.
“I don’t agree with my loved son @JonathanMerritt on everything to be sure,” James posted in November 2021. “But I encourage you to listen to his message on Mark 13. It is both brilliant and faithful to the gospel and the coming of Jesus!”
Buen Pastor Nueva York • 21.11.21 https://t.co/qPq5rpy0JH vía @YouTube No estoy de acuerdo con mi hijo amado @JonathanMerritt en todo para estar seguro. Pero te animo a que escuches su mensaje sobre Marcos 13. ¡Es brillante y fiel al evangelio ya la venida de Jesús!
— Dr. James Merritt (@drjamesmerritt) 22 de noviembre de 2021
El tuit desató una reacción virulenta.
“Wow, ‘southern baptist’ (sic) I now understand more why God is turning His back on you,” one person al corriente. “If you are a pastor and encourage people to listen to your gay son, you clearly, sir, don’t understand gospel!”
However, James’ post also received support. Some praised him for “loving your son unconditionally . . . We need more of this!”
en un tuit de seguimiento, James Merritt defended his stance. “Regardless of who preaches Jesus or speaks truth I rejoice when they do because I love Jesus and truth,” the father wrote. “I can approve a message even when I have disagreements with the messenger.”
Freelance journalist Liz Lykins escribe for WORLD Magazine, Christianity Today, Ministry Watch, and other publications.
Spanish 
English 
63 Respuestas
“Gay Christian” is a qualifier that indicates that one’s sexual desires is more defining of the person than Christianity. Even using that term reveals the inclination of his heart and the author’s bias. Should we all put our besetting sins as our core identity before Christ? He died to set us free and those He has truly redeemed find our identity in Christ alone.
Kristen: Good point. it is sad.
Roys Report, why are you calling him a Christian? Bible is pretty clear this is an oxymoron.
That’s how Jonathan identifies himself, and it’s our policy to honor that. As a news organization, we don’t see it as our job to make judgments about how people identify.
Self identified? How about “I’m a wife-swapping Christian” or “I’m a pedophile Christian? I’m not sure I understand.
This is a disappointing response. Truth does not bow the knee to personal feelings or self identity. I wonder if this response would be the same and handled the same if a man identified himself as a godly pastor when the truth says otherwise.
This is a just policy. I frequently appreciate and applaud your personal and professional Christian maturity and integrity, Julie. For any of us, whether journalists or merely those offering comments, we have a responsibility to note hypocrisy in our own and others’ lives versus our stated faith in Jesus, and our professed obedience to His commands. However, we have NO right nor responsibility to pass judgment on whether another is outside of God’s family or inside, and just GREATLY disobedient, when sin is obvious. We CANNOT separate the wheat from the tares because WE ARE NOT GOD. We merely serve and worship Him, and He has specifically told us that He will take care of that task in His time.
Thank you for the work that TRR does both to point out sin within the church that otherwise would stay hidden and unconfessed, in order to promote repentance…AND for your policy not to play God.
Following the title proclaiming him to be a gay Christian, the first sentence then states, “Jonathan Merritt is a popular author and progressive gay Christian.” The author does not state he identifies as a gay Christian, which would be factually true reporting, but rather goes beyond this by saying he is a gay Christian, thus affirming his self-identification as true and making a judgement that having an unrepentant gay identity, not to mention his promotion of the normalization of homosexuality, is consistent with being a Christian.
Adjectives are frequently applied to many people highlighted on this site that contradict the person’s self-identification, and rightly so, such as “disgraced” pastor.
Would you accept someone as a self-described “(fill in a race)-hating Christian?”
We need not, and should not, accept whatever adjective some people will place in front of “Christian.”
“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” 1 Cor. 6:9-10
As someone who has experienced a cell in hell reserved for someone who thought they were a Christian, let me say that what you say means nothing at all to God. Period. While I am normally with Julie, here I cannot be. Being cast into the lake of fire is reserved for all those who practice evil. There will be no Christian rich greedy persons in heaven. There will be no Christian drunkards. No Christian Celebrity Narcissist swindlers. Putting Christian together with any word that is a practice of evil is an oxymoron. There are no Christian gays in the Kingdom of God along with all the others in this list. Hell was the most real place I have ever been. To not take it seriously is the most grave mistake anyone can ever make on this planet.
“As a news organization, we don’t see it as our job to make judgments about how people identify.” Is that really congruent with every judgment? Many articles state their views, if not judgements. Labeling individuals in articles via the Roys’ organization. It is not indiscernible. However may articles state the view of the journalist writing the article. Using the title “author” would convey authority. Those articles with whom subjective interactions do state and make judgments. I just found 47 articles with those judgements not adhering with. How do you make those subjective decisions? The secular media is foggy, thus zero credibility. Opinion articles should be earmarked. The tissues of objectivity is not infected, however represents gangrene.
All our opinion pieces are clearly marked. There is no opinion in our news articles, except those attributed to sources. I don’t know what 47 articles or examples you’re referring to. But I can assure you that I comb our articles and strike anything that would be considered editorial comment.
Self-identify …. I wonder how many of the articles that begin with the headline “disgraced pastor James McDonald,” or other such guys self-identify as “disgraced?”
When someone is fired and formally disqualified by his board of elders, the term “disgraced” fits.
Kristen…….Spot on and precisely correct. Amazing isn’t it?
““Gay Christian” is a qualifier that indicates that one’s sexual desires is more defining of the person than Christianity.”
I would alternately say that the compound conception of “Gay Christian” indicates that humanity is being taken to be more defining of Christianity than received and not consensually subscribed to theology.
Surely the value and justification of all things Biblical and Christian is to be found in its fruits, where fruits are to be understood in terms of what quality of human being is mediated by adherence to the theses of Bible and Christianity.
“Should we all put our besetting sins as our core identity before Christ? He died to set us free and those He has truly redeemed find our identity in Christ alone.”
The Christ aspect of the ministry of Jesus, is arguably the most complex aspect of the teaching of Jesus that has come down to us. The question of how Jesus understood this aspect, has to be approached by each individual who chooses to follow his received teaching. The metaphor of “following” is far from simple.
One understanding is, and it perhaps somewhat Jewish, is that in following Jesus we are striving to match his approach to God (phrased as it would have been in his time). Such that the Christ aspect has to be understood in terms of an individual’s attitude to God.
My sense then is, that not all of us can aspire to being Christ-like. Rather out Earth-bound humanity remains too large an anchoring part of our being. The question then being: is Christianity only for a spiritual elite who can be Christ-like; or is Christianity also for those of us who remain weighted by our humanity.
If sin is the term we employ to signpost inability to be Christ-like, does it remain the Christian standard we should apply to all Christians.
The Southern Baptist Church, and Christians in general, have little or no problem with Christians who are on their second, or even more, marriages. I cannot judge, but Jesus did. He states that if a man divorces his wife he causes her to commit adultery in Mark 10:11, and Luke 16:18 says if a man divorces his wife he causes her to commit adultery, and he commits adultery himself. The punishment for adultery was the same as for homosexuality, stoning. So many Christians state that gays cannot be Christians, yet say nothing at all about people who are on their second or more marriages. I have never even heard a suggestion in any church that, when someone in their second marriage becomes a Christian they should stop having sex.
As I stated, I cannot judge. These are the words of Jesus Christ Himself.
Hmmm.
Kristen:
One word gets you all bent out of shape. The article IMO is about a father not willing to turn his son away.
Language matters. Adjectives modify nouns. It’s not just one word; it’s a significant linguistic choice.
Yes. We are mediated by the language we make use of. The compound reference “gay Christian”, does lean into that part of the Christian community that has opened their heart to those who present as “gay”, does lean into the emerging understanding that gay being and Christianity are not incompatible.
This does then lean into a societal momentum to be supportive of this compatibility, and averse to arguments as to incompatibility.
Conservative and Progressive Christianity are then engaged in something of a struggle for the soul of Christianity. History then suggesting than society generally is drawn into this initially religious disagreement; which is what we currently see.
We each, individually, then decide what side of the ensuing struggle we are on. Personally I’m on the side of humanity and democracy. It seeming to me that the value of religion lies in what Earth conditions it mediates. Transcendent thinking, what the Bible consists in, offering resource for that; and it not requiring that we cut the umbilical connection with Earth and humanity.
Thank you Tom ……there is room at the table.
A father is going to love his son and daughter even if he disagrees with their lifestyle. Being a son myself, often times it is best not to discuss issues of deep disagreement. You enjoy yourself at a ball game!
We read in the Bible of someone who preached a brilliant sermon on God’s overall care. It was all about how God would give His angels charge over you to keep you, and the Holy Spirit has seen fit to share that sermon with us (though, for over 1900 years, not online). But the preacher left out “in all thy ways”. Is James Merritt absolutely sure his son didn’t leave out something important which he should be pointing out?
The article rightly foregrounds Jonathon’s journey through family and Christianity. Refusing to turn his father away, he strives to secure what relational ground exists on the family and Christian plane. In so doing, and across his father’s attachment to family, he has drawn his father into deep learning.
That learning isn’t Christian specific. Children are seldom clones of their parents. We all, as parents, have to protect and nurture connection with our children, as they deviate from our pathways.
This the moreso in our current world which is changing fundamentally at an unprecedented rate.
Lucky are the parents whose children share with them an impulse to sustain family relation and connection. Respect to Jonathon and James.
9I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the churchb whom you are to judge? 13God judgesc those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”
1Corinthians 5:9-13
These verses seem especially relevant given the policy decision stated elsewhere in the comments: “As a news organization, we don’t see it as our job to make judgments about how people identify.”
From the About section: “The Roys Report is a Christian media outlet, reporting the unvarnished truth.” With the “Christian” qualifier on the media outlet part, that would seem to put the matter of identity within the realm of calling for assessment along Scriptural lines in accordance with Christian doctrine and practice rather than merely offering policies from a news organization with solely that as the description.
Also from the story: “He shared that last week, at an unnamed event, he and his dad spoke publicly about these lessons with hundreds of pastors.” It seems interesting what the hundreds of pastors might applaud when events go unnamed versus how they might position themselves before their paying congregants.
JD, Julie Roys has sometimes spoken to what being a journalist means to her, has spoken of the formal education in journalism that has figured centrally for her, has spoken of the teachers of journalism she had access to and who inspired her.
Reading or listening to these various pieces of self revelation by JR, leaves me with a sense of how being a Christian and being a principled journalist, intermingle in her person and being and spirit. The two aspects complementing one another, rather than being mutually exclusive.
It comes down to, I think, an individual impulse to speak the truth, as one experiences truth, rather than simply restating a received doctrinally expressed truth.
In Christianity, in the societal world in which Christianity partially sits, diversity as to truth abounds, such that respect for and honesty in reporting on this diversity, is indicated. Here the qualities of JR have their place and locus of work. Truth being somewhat revealed in processes of sharing testimony and reporting on how Christianity is proceeding on the ground.
Interesting how so many “Christians” conveniently forget these verses when it comes to other associations…like the unyielding one to Trump.
Or they focus and condemn sins that they themselves would never be guilty of.
This is an agonizing dilemma for a pastor who has made the difficult choice to be a dad first. For that I admire his heart and the unconditional love he has demonstrated. In the church world this will get in you trouble, just ask John Ortberg, who suffered the loss of his church over a choice to protect his son. It seems that in the end, the messenger needs to be consistent in order to be heard according to ecclesiastical standards.
The concern about Ortberg’s son was a molestation allegation, though, not just a lifestyle choice. Big difference.
Ortberg’s son confessed an attraction to children, and his dad permitted him to continue working with minors. That’s different from just having a gay son.
34 “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. 36 And a person’s enemies will be those of his own household.
Matthew 10/34-36
Some great points throughout…
I used to argue endless with my dad re Evolution vs Creation back in my bad old “fightin’ fundy” days….
I came to realize the fact that neither of us knew what we were talking about (neither being professional biologists, geologists, etc.) – and that our relationship was more important.
I only wish I had gotten MORE connected with day much earlier – before he left…
The myth of unconditional love is once again perpetuated. I realize there is the risk of confusing “reason” for “condition”, but no human loves unconditionally. Believing parents seem very quick to compromise their views on sexuality when it involves a loved one. Granted, Evangelicals have been very lax and forgiving when it comes to heterosexual sins. But wait, can anyone objectively enumerate or define a sexual sin any more? If adultery and fornication are no longer considered sins, and if the Jesus standard of One Man, One Woman marriage is no longer recognized, there’s nothing left but chaos and anarchy. We’re no better off than Israel was in Judges 21:25…everyone did what was right in his own eyes.
I am amazed at the folk here who would condemn the son to Hell. I am also amazed at the folk here that would have the father abandon his son. I also notice the cherry picking of scriptures to back their points. What kind of God are they worshiping?
Tom…I feel as you do. Perhaps this is why our world is so messed up. Christians are some of the most critical, judgmental, condemning, and hypocritical people, of which I myself have been guilty. Jesus loved EVERYONE unconditionally in His life and through His death. It’s called GRACE. Why can’t we get that?
And someone commented regarding the message the son ‘preached’…..Philippians 1:15-18 came to mind.
loving and accepting are 2 different things!!!
Loving and accepting are 2 different things…what exactly does that mean? I love you but i don’t want to be in relationship with you. Or I love you but you’re not welcome to come home for Thanksgiving. Or you can come, but leave your partner at home. He’s not welcome in my “Christian house.”
Jason, so I love you but you’re not welcome to come to Thanksgiving dinner bc if you’re allowed to come, it would be me accepting you and your lifestyle. Or I love you but you can’t bring your partner to our house because I dont agree with your lifestyle, etc. I just can’t see Jesus reacting that way. I see him more as a “come into me ALL.” Not the all cleaned up version people. He alone is our Judge. He doesn’t only love the cleaned up folks. If he did, you might not be in that group. I might not be in that group. We are all a work in progress. He forgives up for our past sin, our present sin and our future sin. The thief on the cross didn’t have time to clean up his mess but Jesus had compassion and mercy on him and said he’d be with him in paradise.
Romans 6:15-16 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
Cherry picking scriptures? Can any person show me one scripture where God forgives willful sinners who are unrepentant. Is there one scripture where God gives permission to change or ignore His Word?
Tomás,
I support you 100%. As one myself who has been a Chief sinner in area of sexual immorality, I am picking up what you are putting down. We should however be celebrating pursuit of purity and healthy safe places. The church has failed all of us in this area. For me, physical connection took the place of the hole left by smug and distant church folk.
Without condoning or supporting who or what this man is I have to ask most of the commenters here two questions.
1. Do any of you have a child who identifies as LGBTQ and if so how do you relate to them?
2. What would you do (hypothetically) if you had a child who was?
George,
Excellent questions. Our greatest commandment is to love. I support James Merritt in his journey. We are one body in Christ Jesus. I would do what James is currently doing, probably going to a ballgame. And I would request we all respect James and his son. Hope does not disappoint- Romans 5:5
I have zero problem with staying connected to his or my son if he was gay. that is super, just don’t call him a Christian.
I would graciously tell my child to repent! Within the LGBTQ garb is misgendering which is an affront to Holy design. Second, the roots of this movement has a basis in demonic sexual orientation. Third as a practical manner I would have my child in biblical counseling, remove social media devices, have him/her in solid biblical school or homeschooling. Where education vs indoctrination would be practiced. However, having raised children in this sinful society. I am always discussing these issues with my children. I’m involved with their lives. I’m aware of their social networks. Very limited. Today’s generation is addicted to technology, period. The addictive nature as well as the indoctrination of today’s propaganda machine is all too prevalent. However I’m not isolating my kids churning butter in the woods. The IN and the OF the world has a profound distinction in our family. I got one chance at this.
James, then your gay child, if strong enough, would have to push back across their disagreement with each and every one of the foundational presumptions to your being (which you cite in your post). Would you then be loving enough and strong enough to retain connection between you and your child; would you be prepared to press through the valley of difficulty and mess.
Mess is then an important metaphor. Your foundational presumptions (of belief and faith) provide you with personal certainty. That certainty then incompatible with retaining connection with your strong gay child. Do you choose personal certitude over connection. or do you choose connection and enter the mess.
Arguably, if you are in this world and not of it, and your child is in this world and of it, then you abandon connection. What would Jesus do, suggests itself as an idea. Does theology answer that question best, or does the loving human heart.
Colin, over 18- I would love my child till the day I die. I would not abandon under any circumstance. If that child is under 18, proactive Theology is absolutely practical to every situation I do not see the dichotomy of Theology and Love. Maybe another phrase is “Biblical Love”which does not separate the EQ and IQ. Jesus’ biblical love gets messes. I have homosexual individuals in my extended family. Whom I have a great relationship with. Yet I know what their lifestyle reflects. I have tried to download biblical love which determines the direction, not the perfection of my kids Your premise has a false dilemma. Thus, syllogistically incongruent. That is not a slam, but a biblical/logical reality. Not sure if that helps. I would say that situational sin doesn’t make me pull my biblical stakes nor abandonment to accommodate sin.
James, thank you for your gentle reply. I think our different views regards homsexuality, may stem from our different starting points.
I view what we refer to as the Biblical God, as emerging from an Earth-bound human activity. Such that there is a two-edged truth involved. Firstly we make our god in our own image, then we (re-) make ourselves in the image of our god. We thereby progress.
So the Bible provides us with our image and understanding of God. And we, by way of following law or Jesus, (re-) make ourselves in the image of that God.
The crucial matter then being, because we as Earth-bound human beings have brought all this about, then what we are thereby engaging ourselves in, is not immutable.
My being allows for the world and society to make demands on the Christian project. Your being perhaps favours the extant Bible as immutable.
My being has it, on the in-life evidence available to me, that homosexuality is not a sin; while sexuality without love is something of a sin.
Moving the Christian project from viewing homsexuality as a sin, to where we undo and discard that viewing, will require us all to press through the mess that Jonathan and his father have entered. Developing theology to enable this, is hard, is risky, is necessary.
I thought this was a beautiful article about a father and son disagreeing over some major issues but remaining close. The only part I don’t like is the the fact that they’re Yankee fans!
Agreed! I respect both of them for putting love first….kinda like Jesus did. (But Jesus would definitely not cheer for the Yankees)
So I’m assuming from most of the comments here that John 3:16 only applies to heterosexuals. And that the verse says, “if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you shall be saved (unless you’re not heterosexual, then too bad, no salvation for you.”
Meredith-John 3:16 interpreted could say, For God so loved the “world” (GK- κόσμον-cosmon). We the word cosmo from it. This is not referring to every individual, but a system under Satan’s domain. That system has given birth to homosexuality. Yet, grace transcends every sin. However, Paul tell the church that not even a “hint of sexual immorality” (EPH 5:3) should I the church. So, context is key. Can grace eclipse homosexuality? You bet! Can homosexuality be in the church? No. So context is key. Unbelievers who sin via homosexuality can be redeemed. Believing individuals cannot have this pattern of sin.
James, you are to be respected for the clarity of expression of your understanding; albeit this clarity offers up the fulcrum for opposition to that understanding.
“For God so loved the “world” (GK- κόσμον-cosmon). We the word cosmo from it. This is not referring to every individual, but a system under Satan’s domain. That system has given birth to homosexuality.”
Is this world really “a system under Satan’s domain”? Is the understanding that it is, consistent with the Judaic hermetic on which it stands?
I would say to every individual, test this world for yourself. Rely on the totality of your senses and cerebral and heart capacities, in this testing.
Specifically, if and when someone calls out a gay person as worthy of fundamental condemnation, as unworthy of membership in Christianity, as under Satan’s sway. Then compare the gay individual so condemned, with the individual or grouping or doctrine doing the condemning. Then make your judgement call on the basis of the evidence you have across your own senses and capacities. Judge who is the better human being. Judge who is more like the Jesus of your own understanding.
I can definitely respect Dr. James Merritt for the godly example of loving his gay Son and desiring to have a relationship with him despite their Biblical and Theological differences on the subject of Homosexuality. That being said, I’m concerned for the Son, as he is deceived if he believes that he can live in unrepentant sexual perversion and still claim the banner of “Christian”. The Bible is clear when it says that “No unclean person nor idolater will enter into the Kingdom of God”. People that understand the message of the Gospel know that repentance and faith in Christ and His finished work on the Cross is what constitutes Salvation, and if people can continue in their Sins without the evidence of true repentance, then their profession of faith is highly questionable….no matter how nice, articulate, or even knowledgable of the Bible they are!
“… I’m concerned for the Son, as he is deceived if he believes that he can live in unrepentant sexual perversion and still claim the banner of “Christian”. The Bible is clear when it says that “No unclean person nor idolater will enter into the Kingdom of God”.”
Wayne, this is where theologically grounded discussion begins. Is the phrasing you cite, adequate to understanding what it nominally addresses. Does its logic hold up when examined. Is our understanding of what it is to “enter into the Kingdom of God”, adequate and valid.
I’m happy to go to the barricades on this matter. Happy to confront and oppose the understanding that being gay amounts to being an “unclean person”. If Christianity chooses to dash itself to a degree of destruction on this foolish reef, others can still call for an alteration of course.
If it comes to a choice between received theology and the evidence of my own senses, I will always choose the latter; albeit I’m then open to discussion on my choice.
Never abandon discussion with those who disagree with you.
Colin, when the Bible speaks of “Unclean” People, it is obviously speaking of immoral and impure People, People that have not been washed in the blood of Jesus, thus any sexually immoral person would be considered “Unclean” Biblically speaking. That is especially true when a person falsely believes that they are right with God when in reality they are not. The book of Hebrews warns against the “Deceitfulness of Sin”. James Merritt appears to be deceived like a lot of Homosexuals that claim Christ though they see nothing wrong with the sin and perversion.
As Believers, there are two things that we CANNOT do as it pertains to Homosexuals:
A. To hate them, as we are taught to demonstrate love to all.
B. To affirm them….because we cannot affirm what God does not affirm.
Wayne. “… when the Bible speaks of “Unclean” People, it is obviously speaking of immoral and impure People, People that have not been washed in the blood of Jesus, thus any sexually immoral person would be considered “Unclean” Biblically speaking.”
Across the OT and the NT, viewing homosexual persons as unclean or immoral or impure, carries fundamental existential weight. Weight which places such persons outwith the community.
When those views carry into expression in our current era, they clash fundamentally with what culture and law (certainly in most Western societies) demand for all.
That should then take our thinking back to reading the Bible contextually, with an understanding of what culture and law subsisted in at various points of the Bible’s authoring.
The Christian fundamental belief you express as being washed “in the blood of Jesus”, then has complex collective underpinnings; underpinnings which have been open to question, by Christians and non-Christians since the time of Jesus’s ministry.
Thus, in a current moment, we see an intersecting of this historical questioning, which focuses on and challenges the viewing of homosexual persons as “unclean”. Here an argument as to being outwith “salvation” and outwith community, come to be maximally opposed. In a moment where culture and law are allied to that opposing.
Thank you for saying this!
Unclean in the Bible referred to many things. For example giving birth, having a skin disease (eczema), or burying a dead relative. How unfortunate for all those with eczema, psoriasis, and the like.
I want to post a reply but I’m just a simple-minded person who considers myself a Christian and not nearly as articulate as some who have replied to this thread. I noticed that 3 people so far are responsible for 35% of the posts and they have very strong feelings on this topic. It’s unfortunate the collective “we” of the church are ok with shooting the wounded. I, however, am not. I side on the side of grace, mercy, and love. Only God knows a person’s heart, and all will stand before him. It’s not up to me to judge or condemn. Thank you JR for your ministry.
Thank you Julie for this heartwarming article. Very inspiring to see this love-based struggle for relationship between a son and father with very different perspectives.
Very disheartening to see some of the smug responses afterwards. But that’s the “Christian Love” the world has come to expect from the self-identified “Bible-believers” unfortunately.
Love this article. Thank you Julie. I have been inspired by Jonathan for many years. It is a wonder that there are any Jesus-following LGBTQIA+ people (who are willing to admit it), due to the way they have been treated by (primarily) the evangelical church/Christians. We cis-hetero Christians can learn a lot about love and grace from them, and they reflect God to us in such a clear way.