The job of a pastor is to speak articulately and clearly. Yet for the Sold-Out Shepherds highlighted in Megan Basham’s best-selling book, Shepherds for Sale, their defense seems to be a brash admission of their inarticulate past. Combined with self-victimizing, these pastors appear angry as hornets that Basham had the audacity to report their words, cite their sermons, and publish their affiliations.
Walking the tightrope between signaling a softer (to use their own adjective) evangelicalism and tapping into the deep pockets of the traditionalistic believers that provide the bulk of financial giving in their congregation has proven to be a circus act that can be done, but not forever. It’s not been easy for some of America’s biggest names in Evangelicalism to parade their virtue among the pagans while convincing their parishioners and financial donors that they remain a bulwark of biblical fidelity. Claiming that ‘only their language has changed,’ but not their positions, remains a trick so cheap that many are beginning to see it. And in response, some have levied serious attacks against Megan Basham and her book, Shepherds for Sale.
Slander. Hate. Bigotry. Journalistic malfeasance. Poor research. Needlessly Provocative. UnChristlike.
In reality, Basham has only cited their own words, quoted their own sermons, referenced their own tweets and lectures, and chronicled their self-described positions. These shepherds seem not upset at a recalling of their intellectual offerings, but rather seem upset that their own congregations are becoming aware that something more sinister is at play.
Several responses from those covered in Basham’s book with great, painstakingly accurate receipts draw upon a number of offensive attacks (mentioned above: slander, hate, bigotry, etc) but only one primary defense. These same men who have become famous for their supposed adeptness at articulation claim that they said it, they wrote it, but they didn’t mean it like that. Watching their stuttering, stammering, stigmatizing responses in recent days has one wondering at first why, after years of these accusations being made known, they are giving a public relations response that appears to have been sketched out on a Waffle House napkin at 2 AM between sips of coffee and checking for X updates.
We jest. These types of men do not eat at Waffle House.
Relatively little, if anything, that Basham reports in Shepherds for Sale is new except, perhaps, that they are now atop the New York Times Best Sellers List. These men have had years to levy thoughtful responses – certainly more thoughtful than what they have provided thus far – to countless sources that Basham cites in her book. But back then, their critics were ‘just bloggers,’ involuntarily celibate men in their basement typing away on Cheeto-stained fingers (as they characterized many of us), and responses (so they thought) would never be needed. They were, like Wall Street, an institution in evangelicalism. But to their horror, a plucky blonde woman who happened to work for The Daily Wire, a juggernaut in news and publishing, just so happened to be inclined to give a megaphone to the tens of thousands of small church pastors and faithful attendees in the pew who have been shouting from rooftops that many evangelical leaders had not only drifted left but were actively swimming there. In the end, Big Eva (as it came to be called) made the same mistake as the Political Left, if there is any distinction left between these two at all. They thought that because they had shored up their support in legacy publications like The New York Times and Christianity Today, they would never have to answer. It turns out that God Almighty has had other plans.
Now, they’re answering…poorly.
We have no desire to match word-for-word JD Greear’s mid-length novella he posted yesterday in defense of himself, and neither do we claim such lengthiness is unwarranted on his part. He has ignored all warnings, great and small, up until now, no matter how many thousands of Christians preceded Basham’s book. There is a lot to defend. He made an attempt. That’s the best summary that can be provided of his ten thousand word essay. An attempt was made. Bless him.
Entitled An Open Response to Megan Basham’s Shepherds for Sale, Greear lays out six issues that he claims need correction, despite no correction of substance being provided. A correction, in journalistic terms, is issued when a quotation is misquoted, a fact misstated, a citation in error. None were offered. But after a lengthy introduction, or series of introductions, Greear admirably and repeatedly confessed to the various accusations Basham levied.
For example, Greear wrote, “I addressed the issue [on gender dysphoria] again in 2022, explaining how my thinking had (I hope) matured and grown clearer…”
One wonders if Greear missed the forest for the trees, trying to frantically discover nits that could be picked somewhere in the margins of Basham’s book. But that’s the point. Why does a pastor, theologian, and evangelical thought leader need to have his positions on transgenderism ‘mature’ or grow ‘clearer’? Is the issue not as simple as the ordinarily unlearned, unwashed masses of evangelicals understand it to be? And why does someone as articulate as JD Greear have to (as you will see) repeatedly apologize for his lack of articulation on – and only on – the hot-button issues in the political and cultural realm?
“I addressed the issue [on gender dysphoria] again in 2022, explaining how my thinking had (I hope) matured and grown clearer…”
JD Greear
Again, Greear admits a failure of clarity on what is arguably the most important dividing line between orthodoxy and apostasy today, an affirmation of Genesis 1:27, “In the beginning, God created them, both male and female.” This very much gives the typical evangelical “blind guide vibes,” which is the crux of the problem. Protestia covered Greear’s backpedaling on this issue at the time, but suffice it to say, he was for bearing false witness via pronouns before he was against it. It’s similar to his backpedaling on his assertion that “the Bible whispers about homosexuality,” which, of course, it does not (homosexuality is used in the New Testament repeatedly as the benchmark of human depravity).
The list of progressive positions held to – at least at one time – by Greear is too multitudinous to mention in great detail. These include promoting identity politics in the Southern Baptist election process, comparing conservatives to Pharisees and terrorists (long before January 6, 2021), promoting “gender justice” at The Gospel Coalition, joining an organization funded by George Soros to promote leftist causes, or doing what Janet Mefferd characterized at the time as, “playing footsie with an imam who’s promoted jihad against Israel.” Except for laughing and celebrating with his church being the recipient of Pulpit and Pen’s Worst Christian of the Year Award in 2019 for overseeing the leftward departure of the SBC, there has never been a straightforward response from Greear like anything he provided in a rebuttal to Basham.
But the list could easily go on.
He told us that voting Democrat could be a great option for Christians. He claimed that Muslims and Christians worship the same God. He insinuated that greed and homosexuality are moral equivalents. He promoted the views of an “evangelical” lesbian. He tells his church to give more money and ‘spread their privilege‘ around. He hosted Obama’s campaign strategist to lecture about social justice. He made Jesus’ sacrificial death about a social justice kind of privilege.
Again, the list could go on. But instead, we’ll merely point out that Greear provided a list of six – count them, six – non-corrective ‘corrections’ to Shepherds For Sale.
Before getting to his list, Greear makes another admission, “Basham is asking many vital questions. Personally, I need them. If ‘love of this present world’ corrupted some of the Apostle Paul’s companions, it can certainly happen to me, too. As iron sharpens iron, challenging questions help us see where we lack courage or fail to communicate with clarity. I believe this can be done while honoring truth and treating one another with charity, befitting the Savior whose name we bear.”
While Greear might receive bonus points for comparing himself to the Apostolic entourage, the points must be stricken from the record for being insufferably dishonest. Look at the cited sources and hyperlinks above. Click the articles, and do your own research. Most of this mountain of evidence of Greear’s unabashed liberalism didn’t even make its way into Basham’s book, lest it be a book all unto itself. The claim from Greear that he is only guilty of being ‘unclear’ is an insult to the intelligence of every Christian who has been paying attention and screaming our warnings into the abyss long before Basham wrote her book. She’s just not the little people he can ignore any longer.
The claim from Greear that he is only guilty of being ‘unclear’ is an insult to the intelligence of every Christian who has been paying attention and screaming into the abyss our warnings long before Basham wrote her book.
It is sufficient – in discounting Greear’s six claims as spurious – that none of them contradict the facts presented by Megan Basham. Not one. They are, rather, attempts to obfuscate, to explain away a tiny fraction of the overarching, undeniable accusations against him of working against the mission of Christ within the Body Politic. Regarding his “The Bible whispers about homosexuality,” Greear merely argues, “I acknowledged that faults in communication are almost always the fault of the communicator and that I was guilty of using unwise and unhelpful words.” That’s weird for a self-styled Master Communicator, right? It feels like we all got into a time machine back to 2015 to hear Karen Swallow Prior – an English professor – confess to poor wording over and again whenever her liberalism was betrayed and outrage ensued. Pray-tell, Greear defenders, how is it Basham’s fault that she took Greear’s words at face value, even if we were to believe they were hastily and sloppily inadvertent?
On his second contention, regarding his (well documented) support for Critical Theory and racial politics, Greear complains she took excerpts from ‘virtual addresses’ as though, in his universe, his spoken words don’t matter as much as his written ones. It is a novel approach to criticizing a well-researched journalist and might be the first time the attempt was ever made. But the attempt was made. Referring to his choice to sloganeer the phrase Black Lives Matter, Greear writes, “I understand that Basham (and others) may question whether it was wise to even use the three words “black lives matter,” given that many may confuse affirmation of those words for support of the movement.”
In the heat of the Black Lives Matter movement, Greear would have us believe that his use of the phrase was merely coincidental. Interestingly, he has never used the phrase “Make America Great Again” and claimed it had nothing to do with conservatism. This is a game, and everyone knows it. Again, we should all feel our intelligence has been insulted, if not molested. But this aside, Greear again claims his words could maybe have been better chosen.
Greear shifts his focus away from his own professed unclarity to obfuscate through accusation. Regarding Basham’s citation of his reference to conservative critics as “demonic,” Greear explains that he was only referring to “attacks from people who refuse honest dialogue, who walk with a divisive spirit, or put primary emphasis on secondary issues.” Considering that he characterized Basham in these exact same ways, we can only presume that he considers her demonic and probably feels that way toward anyone who reads and recommends her book. This is hardly a correction but a doubling-down on the schismatic division that he has ultimately caused by his “lack of clarity.”
Greear also engages in another kind of obfuscation – duplicity. This type includes listing quotations appearing to be contrary to his other statements on, for example, Critical Race Theory. It is true, as Greear suggests, that numerous times he has said that Critical Race Theory is an “important discussion” and has “inherent dangers.” He does not, however, categorically reject it (how could he, considering he advocated it as a “helpful analytical tool” at the Southern Baptist Convention?). This is important to understand; saying two contrary things about a subject depending upon your audience does not make the one citing your words a slanderer; it only makes you a two-faced, forked tongue, ear-tickler who at best is “unclear” and at worst is a theological chameleon changing shades with your surroundings.
This is important to understand; saying two contrary things about a subject depending upon your audience does not make the one citing your words a slanderer; it only makes you a two-faced, forked tongue, ear-tickler who at best is “unclear” and at worst is a theological chameleon changing shades with your surroundings.
Another kind of obfuscation is used in his fifth contention on immigration, in which he defends being a part of George Soros’ Evangelical Immigration Table. Never mind, ye plebes and deplorables, that Greear previously denied any tie to progressive Dark Money. After listing other signatories, Greear quite laughably says, “Hardly a list of woke progressives boasting George Soros tattoos.” Here, Greear tries to tie himself to the celebrity of other signers, some of whom, contrary to his claim, are, in fact, woke progressives. But what Greear fails to realize in his celebrity hubris is that an attempt to tie himself to such a horde to exonerate himself only exonerates Megan Basham’s claim that the problem is systemic and the infiltrators are many. Curiously, Greear leaves out the fact that some original signatories, like Eric Metaxas, left the Evangelical Immigration Table in 2013 after it became known that it was a Soros front group. And yet, Greear not only remained a signatory but 11 years later, still defends it. Greear is hedging his bets on being declared innocent by the company he keeps and the general ignorance of his reader.
Again, it appears lowly, non-connected evangelicals could use a #MeToo Movement for our intelligence because it is clearly being abused.
Greear’s list ends with a final admission of error, which was to act in ignorance with regard to evangelical elites (himself included) accusing FBC Naples of racism for choosing not to hire a pastor on the far left of the political spectrum. But that doesn’t count, Greear argues, because it was done in ignorance.
Cutting through the clutter, it is evident from Greear’s rebuttal that it was no rebuttal at all. It was an admission of guilt that he repeatedly spoke unclearly, his views needed to be refined, he needed to mature, and he often acted in ignorance when taking public positions. Obfuscation aside, Greear’s guilt in the matter is far worse. He has pled to a misdemeanor so as to not be guilty of a felony. The evidence will show, carefully collected by thousands, published in various places by hundreds and notably by dozens, that Greear is guilty of exactly what Basham has claimed; he has sold out.
In his lengthy, finger-wagging preface, Greear comments, “I want to state upfront and unequivocally that our church has never received funding from any political groups, and I have never received any financial incentives to take a particular position. The book never charges me with that specifically, but since that is part of its overall thesis, I want to be clear.”
Although organizations steered by Greear certainly have received funding from leftist organizations for the purpose of propagandizing the Church, it may or may not be true that Greear is innocent of taking any filthy lucre personally. For the rest of us, we may very well be left wondering if Greear’s sell-out was akin to Judas betraying Jesus for 30 pieces of silver, or if he merely sold out Christ for the applause.
