February 2, 2013

Jay Bakker’s LGBTQ Power Struggle


By Wendy Wright

“There is nothing in the Bible about homosexuality as we understand it,” said Jay Bakker at a panel denouncing therapy to help homosexuals change.  In an event meant to influence UN delegates – though virtually all attending were from homosexual groups – the son of televangelists Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker accused Christians who don’t affirm homosexuality of being a dying breed, beholden to money and power.

“I do believe that heterosexism is probably going to be the death blow to the American Evangelical church,” he charged. The “Evangelical church here in America is no longer respected among most people for their work against LGBTQ [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning], so they’re having to find other places where they have power and influence, or where their financial stream comes from,” like Uganda.

“Some of these folks get used to a certain lifestyle,” which is “an addictive thing. A lot of the leaders in Christianity are looking to be validated . . . by everyone, not just by people in their own realm.”

Bakker, the tattooed-covered pastor of Revolution Church in Brooklyn, was the last speaker on a panel on “Selling Sexual Orientation Change Therapy: International Health and Policy Consequences of Sexual Orientation Change Efforts (SOCE).” The UN office of the Unitarian Universalist Association hosted the event in New York City at the end of January to push the idea that reparative therapy, or counseling to help people overcome homosexual behavior, is a violation of human rights.

Bakker was the clean-up speaker following an activist psychologist, UN staffer, Southern Poverty Law Center attorney and his client – a former patient of reparative therapy, and a scientist. Each presupposed that efforts to change homosexual orientation are harmful, discriminatory, hateful acts of religious pressure to conform, and should be banned. People who struggle with homosexuality must learn to affirm their sexual desires. People with traditional and religious beliefs must conform to a new human rights regime.

Bakker began with his own story. A pastor for almost 20 years, he came out as an ally for homosexual rights about 7 years ago. Within 24 hours he lost every speaking engagement for the next year, and a month later laid off his staff.

As he searched “to prove to myself literally that it was OK to be gay in the Bible,” he realized “that the word homosexuality didn’t even exist until 1879, but somehow it’s in a 2,000-year old book. And when you start to read things within its context, and within its history, you start to realize that there’s nothing in the Bible about homosexuality as we understand it.”

Things have progressed in the past 7 years, to now, “we weren’t going to allow a pastor to pray for the President because he had said something that was anti-gay.”

“I believe that if you want to be a literalist, affirming Christian who affirms LGBTQ folks, you definitely can do that,” he told the crowd. “I don’t believe 100% of the Bible, I’m not a literalist. But I do believe in LGBT rights, and I do perform LGBT weddings.”

Dr. Rebecca Jordan-Young, who spoke before Bakker, warned the panelists against arguing that homosexuality is biological. She studied that theory for 10 years, and the science does not back it up.

However, she is “deeply in agreement with the premise” that efforts to change sexual orientation are a violation of human rights. The problem is a “larger context of power relations, social structures that systematically devalue and separate gay and lesbian people from resources in the community.”

Yet, people experiencing unwanted same-sex attraction should be barred from therapy that can help them change. “What if we did know what changed sexual orientation? Does that mean we should use it?” she asked. “Obviously, no.”

Bakker recounted his attempts to confront Evangelical pastors. He blames their failure to endorse homosexuality on a fear of losing money, power and acceptance.

Joel Osteen “was someone who probably really wanted to be an ally, but was surrounded by people who said you can’t be an ally. The amount of pressure that these men – these leaders are seeing is they’ll have to give up everything else they do, every person they help will suffer if they stand up for this group.”

A year after meeting with Bill Hybels, Willow Creek “ended their relationship with Exodus and other ex-gay ministries. I can’t take credit for it, but I would like to say Exodus gave us credit for it.”

“I also got to meet with people such as Rick Warren,” Bakker said. “I actually went to their church, we had a meeting set up, and at the last minute they cancelled.”

Bakker’s traumatic childhood, marred by his flamboyant parents’ sex and financial scandals, led to struggles with substance abuse and distrust of other ministries. Now the 37-year old views himself as an elder to these pastors he labeled greedy cowards.

They should be seen as “people who truly are trying to care but are insecure and don’t really know where they belong in this world anymore,” he said. “It’s my job to reach out to them and tell them this is the civil rights issue of today. And you’ll see them argue, ‘what about sex trafficking?’ It’s not like I decided that this is the civil rights issue of today. But in the United States this is our civil rights issue of today.”

In 2012, Bakker demonstrated against North Carolina’s marriage amendment. It passed handily, with a 20-point margin.

“You don’t rewrite the nature of God’s design for marriage based on the demands of a group of adults,” Tami Fitzgerald, chairwoman of the marriage campaign, told the New York Times.


Wendy Wright is Vice President, C-FAM

Tagged with:

89 Responses to Jay Bakker’s LGBTQ Power Struggle

  1. bravelass says:

    ““Some of these folks get used to a certain lifestyle,” which is “an addictive thing.”

    That irony problem of his must be awfully painful.

  2. Fred Garvin says:

    Bakker is the freak son of freak parents. He even has his mother’s eyelashes without mascara.
    Religion is such a waste of time.

  3. Ray Bannister says:

    “There’s nothing in the Bible about homosexuality as we understand it.”

    That’s not just stupidity, that is stupidity on steroids. Does this dimwit not have a clue what cities like Corinth and Rome were like in the New Testament period?

    Not to hard to analyze what’s going on here: raised by two parents who were held up to public ridicule, he’s doing his version of the Franky Schaeffer schtick: Please don’t be harsh to me, I’m not like THEM! Please love me!”

    • Jay Bakker says:

      That’s a nice way to some me up.

    • Eric Lytle says:

      Letting him and Little Franky do a rant duet on stage would be a comedy act that would put Laurel and Hardy to shame. Nothing’s funnier than some angry, no-talent loser trying to act dead serious.

      Must be sad, being nothing but a one-line footnote in your parents’ biography.

      • Gus Ravenwheel says:


        By this shall all men know you are my disciples: if you have love one for another…


      • Eric Lytle says:

        This misbegotten tattooed publicity W is not my Christian brother, so keep your prissy old maid sanctimony to yourself. Someone so openly contemptuous toward the Bible belongs to some other religion, probably Narcissism.

        Yeah, I know: “Shame on you.” Keep using that line, it’s been SO effective in shutting people up so far.

      • Gus Ravenwheel says:

        My brother, I think you could use a bit of shame in your life – shame of the contemptuousness and self-pride with which you speak, shame for the lack of grace. But a proud heart has a hard time hearing their own arrogance.

        Do you not fear that this sort of arrogance and self-certainty is not a way of expressing contemptuousness towards the Bible, which teaches us to disagree in love and respectfully?

        And as always, I’d ask that instead of making a personal attack on folk, tell me specifically where you think I’m mistaken, if indeed, you think I’m mistaken. Let’s talk about ideals, brother, not petty put-downs and name-calling.

        In Christ,

        Dan Trabue

      • Jay Bakker says:

        A no talent -loser, I feel like I’m back in high school, the comments here are so angry and extreme it’s hard not to find them a bit humorous…

        P.S. if you go to RevolutionNYC.com you will find that very talk,
        I interviewed Frank about six months ago.

      • Jay Bakker says:

        The “one line footnote” comment was a pretty awesome burn… You got me good with that one!

  4. Michael Davis says:

    What a sad human being!

  5. I do believe that people reading these articles are looking to shout out their already imbedded position or are trying to find the answer(s). Should it be the last, try to search a Bible that is written with older translation and avoid COMPLETE interpretation just by men- and with the Holy Spirit’s guidance,set out and ponder the word of God.

    • Sandy N says:

      All the versions of the Bible, including the original Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament, condemn homosexuality. The fact that the actual word “homosexual” did not appear in any English Bible until the 20th century does not mean that the earlier versions did not refer to it. You think our ancestors imposed an “interpretation” on the Bible. you are imposing your own interpretation, but you think that’s OK. The Holy Spirit is not going to lead people to distort the clear meaning of the Bible, but I don’t expect someone who is biblically illiterate to know much about the Holy Spirit either. If these articles upset you, don’t read them, go read websites where everyone thinks exactly like you do and is equally clueless about the Bible. No one’s forcing you to join a religion that believes in the Bible. the Unitarians don’t, and they are assertively pro-gay. Find a religion that suits you and give other people the freedom to believe what we like. You people talk a lot about “equality” and “tolerance” but you sure don’t practice them, you constantly mock Christians and mock the Bible.

      • Gus Ravenwheel says:


        All the versions of the Bible, including the original Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament, condemn homosexuality.

        All the versions of the Bible condemn heterosexuality, too. Both heterosexuality and homosexuality can be done “wrong.” But that some gay or straight acts are condemned in places in the Bible is not to say that ALL gay and straight acts are condemned.

        Where specifically would that conclusion be mistaken?

        I’d encourage you to deal with the arguments being made rather than take character attacks on people who disagree with your cultural, human traditions.

      • Sandy N says:

        Feel free to quote some of the verses that condemn heterosexuality. Your chronic case of logorrhea may finally get cured.

      • Gus Ravenwheel says:

        You are unfamiliar with verses condemning male-female rape? You’re not female with verses condemning men bedding down their daughters or their aunts? You’re not familiar with the verses condemning male/female adultery?

        There are MANY more verses condemning some aspect of straight behavior than there are condemning some aspect of gay behavior.

        Again, rather than attacking me personally, tell me specifically where I am mistaken.

        It’s easy to be short on words if all you’re going to do is snipe and twist words and bear false witness, but that’s not the Christian way to go, right? Explaining things in a step by step rational manner can take more words. Sorry if I talk too much but it’s in an effort to help you understand my actual position.

        Speaking of bearing false witness and correct understanding, the last I looked you hadn’t responded to the 4-5 false claims you made against me in a previous post: If you make a mistake and bear false witness in error, don’t you agree that it’s important to admit that mistake and repent?

        And again, if you can’t read my words written in your own language and coming from a similar background in the same culture, don’t you think you ought to be cautious about claiming some sort of inerrant understanding of ancient texts?

        ~Dan Trabue

      • Gus Ravenwheel says:


        you constantly mock Christians

        Interestingly, the only one being mocked here is Mr Bakker…

      • Gus Ravenwheel says:

        Sandy, you’re establishing a habit of asking for someone to make their argument, they make their argument and then you abandon the conversation, almost as if you have nothing on your side to support your “argument” other than snide remarks and false representations.

        It’s okay to make a mistake, it happens to all of us. But, once you have been corrected, the right thing to do – the Christian thing to do – is to admit the mistake and apologize and move on.

        Come on sister, embrace that grace by which we are saved. Embrace repentance for your own sins before you try to remove the speck from a brothers’ eye.


  6. John Abbott says:

    He did not do a very good job biblical research. But I don’t suppose anyone expected him too. There is real danger in believing that God is unfair or unreasonable. If you do not believe in God you are free to do whatever you want as you risk eternity on your rejection of God and Scripture.

  7. Sandy N says:

    Tattoos, pierced lip, and son of Jim and Tammy – and he expects to be taken seriously?

    On the bright side, at least he’s not posing as an orthodox Christian.

    • Jay Bakker says:

      Took the lip ring out a few years ago and yes maybe not by you but the UN seemed to..

      • Sandy N says:

        Oh, well, pardon me. I don’t know any higher arbiter of Christian orthodoxy than the UN. I’m glad they’ve given your their imprimatur, I expect Benedict XVI, Rick Warren, and Pat Robertson to abdicate and put you in charge. Hope your first gay wedding in St. Peter’s Basilica goes well. You may hear a loud whirring sound as Peter spins in his grave.

        Now we have one more good reason to despise the UN.

      • Jay Bakker says:

        Despise, are you kidding?

    • Gus Ravenwheel says:

      You know what they said about John the Baptist, don’t you?

      “Camel hair, eating locusts, ranting like a loon in the desert – and he expects to be taken seriously?”

      The more things change, the more they stay the same, at least in some ways.

      ~Dan Trabue

  8. Eli_P says:

    Now the 37-year old views himself as an elder to these pastors he labeled greedy cowards. They should be seen as “people who truly are trying to care but are insecure and don’t really know where they belong in this world anymore,”

    Right, it couldn’t possibly be that they actually believe homosexuality is WRONG because the Bible says it is, it MUST be that they are just insecure about what may happen if they support it. Joel Osteen and Rick Warren are awful examples of “Christian leaders” anyway, as they too, are not directionally sound, SO, concerned with people feeling good about themselves and having the life that makes them happy, but still.

    Notice there was zero biblical evidences cited that would affirm homosexuality? And as far as the word not existing IN ENGLISH until 1879, what does that possibly have to do with the Bible not talking about it? The word used before that was “effeminate” which was the English equivalent to the Greek word “malakos” which IS in the Bible (1 Cor 6:9). Not to mention the old testament specifically lauds out that”man shall not lay with mankind as he does with the woman;” Leviticus 18:22).

    Jay Bakker: worst. researcher. ever.

    • Jay Bakker says:

      Worst ever, really you figured that out from an article about a five minute talk I gave… lol!

      • Eli_P says:

        Much like when I smell that milk has soured I don’t think, “maybe I should drink the whole gallon, just to make sure…” Some thinks you only need a sample of to see it can’t be trusted.

  9. Jay, you may be right about having not read one of your books or heard one of your sermons…but in the article that we did read you made some fairly weak assertions on what the Bible does and does not say…it is fairly easy to discern that you are not a biblical scholar…but you are a person that seems to be willing to justify sin by indicating God loves everyone. Yes…I do believe God loves everyone…but God does not tolerate lifestyles that go against his commands and precepts.

    • Jay Bakker says:

      You really crack me up… Seriously, did you considering that I was speaking to a very diverse crowd and didn’t think it appropriate to talk on Tillich’s systematic theology or the laws Rome had about male penetration or the practices of fertility god’ worship… Maybe next time I have five minutes at the UN I’ll cover more ground. 🙂

  10. Bryan Kemper says:

    Well Jay I have met you, spent time with you and have read many of the things you have written.

    You once told me Jesus would walk into an abortion clinic and hold a woman’s hand and help her get an abortion. In fact you told a whole Christian Festival audience that.

    I think it is obvious that you don’t have an actual grasp on the the Character of God if you can say He would do something so against His law. We can sit here and point out all the places in the Bible where it teaches against homosexuality but that will not prove anything to you as you just don’t seem to believe the Bible to be the inherent word of God, you only pick the parts that comply with your fluffy love version of Christianity.

    I love you brother and will continue to pray for you, but you are way off base here.

    • Jay Bakker says:

      Coming from you I’ll take that as a complement…

    • Jay Bakker says:

      It’s like old times, have a cigar and tell me why I’m wrong… Funny somethings never change!

    • Bryan Kemper says:

      Jay a snarky comment does not make you right.

      • Jay Bakker says:

        Have you read most of these comments, if I wasn’t a little snarky I’d probably brake…
        You and me have always had issues with each others theology but this stuff is just extreme, juvenile and silly.
        When in Rome!

    • Jay Bakker says:

      I appreciate your kindness.
      I do believe the verses often used have nothing to do with a loving relationship and believe history and context prove this.

      • Jeremy Baines says:

        So you think that when Paul wrote his letters, two men who were attracted to each other were not capable of a “loving relationship,” but now they are, so that makes it OK? Your grasp of history is poor, your grasp of the gay culture is even worse. If you think men lurking around public restrooms shows their eagerness to commit to wedded bliss, raise kids, and be scoutmasters, then your idea of “loving relationship” is most peculiar. People who live in the gutter don’t need their lifestyle sanctioned by the church, and they certainly shouldn’t be working with children.

        Paul was a realist, he was living in an “anything goes” culture not so different from ours. When he wrote about such people having no share in the kingdom of God, he wasn’t trying to tailor the gospel to an immoral culture, he was insisting that Christians lead better lives than the trash around them. If you’d care to read some of the other articles on IRD, you’d notice that the more the liberal churches lower their moral standards, the fewer people attend. Obviously you have the mental and emotional development of a six-year-old, so you’ll do anything to get attention, which makes say shocking things that will upset Christians. Frankly I wish they’d never posted this article, because, child that you are, you’re probably enjoying the way you upset adults.

  11. Jay,
    I won’t slam you like so many have done, but to simply say this, while we love those in sin, the word of God never changes. Societies change, cultures change, ideas change, but God changes not, nor his word. If sin (in this case homosexuality) was wrong when the Apostle Paul penned those words, then it remains sin today and even worse, those who indulge in that lifestyle are damned if they do not repent. How else can we win the lost if we cannot honestly tell them the truth? That homosexuality is not only error, it destroys the body, spirit and soul. No my friend, if we love the sinner, if we love those who are in darkness, we will present the gospel as Jesus did at the well, without condemnation but truth.


    • Jay Bakker says:

      Tj and Christopher152:
      I appreciate your kindness.
      I do believe the verses often used have nothing to do with a loving relationship and believe history and context prove this.

  12. TJ says:

    Jay, I appreciate learning the why behind your thoughts and being a spectator to your journey (I’m sure that’s difficult no matter where you land theologically). I watched your Sundance TV series back in the day, I’ve read Fall to Grace, and I look forward to reading your next book.

    I disagree with your thoughts on this issue, b/c I don’t believe that the Bible is silent on this. I guess where I’m landing on this all is that Jesus was a friend and healer to people stuck in sin, without affirming their lifestyle (Go and sin no more). I’m glad friends do the same with me when I’m stuck. Grace. Jesus – friend of sinners, full of grace and truth.

    I’m not on a mission to embarrass, preach at, or spew hate at any person.

    All that to say – thanks for being open to dialogue and thanks for letting us trace along with your life. I’m learning and challenged to think hard and love more.


  13. Jay,

    If we could then leave the snark aside – and in honest curiosity, what makes you think you’ve got it right about history and context and the true biiblical witness?

    You have to re-write 2000 years of Church history, theology and practice. And not just one point of theology, but on a whole bunch such as:

    1) what is marriage
    2) the sinfulness, or not, of sexual intimacy outside of marriage
    3) how we define love/loving relationships
    4) the New Testament directive for elders to be faithful to one spouse
    5) the meaning of chastity, fornication,

    I could go on, but there are also what we might term the natural law arguments against, most clearly, male-with-male sexual intimacy -both from an infectious disease perspective and that of simple human physiology and the consequences of violating our telos. These consequences are inherent in the nature of the act involved, no matter how vigorously you argue that the relationship really is loving.

    And that’s not even getting into those heterosexual acts which you rightly point out, the Bible condemns.

    I’m actually no elitist. Most of the time my arguments are quite elementary and simple. In this context, the thing I wonder about the most is:

    How many people really understand that if we all practiced chastity, meaning celibacy as singles (which is usually) followed by lifetime monogamy within the marriage of one man and one woman — how many people genuinely comprehend that this would wipe out a growing number of infectious diseases, some of which are incurable?

    • nicdave says:

      so the only way to spread infectious diseases is from a male to a male?
      GET SERIOUS!!!
      The most significant number of sexually transmitted disesases occur in the “heterosexual” realm of men and women sleeping around with each other.

      Going by what you said above, you are living in a wholly unrealistic world my friend. In the stereotype of a “nice Christian, everyone loves Jesus world” celibacy and monogomous relationships may happen. But the truth is that not everyone loves Jesus. And not everyone will. Therefore, who are we to force our human interpretation of the bible onto a society where a significant number of people don’t believe what you do.

      I love Jesus. And I actually love another woman, who I am getting legally married to this year. And I believe and KNOW that God will be rejoicing over that union. Why? Because God is God and I/we am/are not.

      • Adrian C says:

        Do you think we’re that stupid that we don’t know the main cause of the spread of HIV? Don’t call me “unrealistic” if you’re that dense. Your shrill tone is very typical of your subculture. If you were adults you would own up to this, but you aren’t adults. People with the sexual morals of adolescents have brains to match.

        You may think you’re “getting married,” maybe it’s even “legal,” but there is no “marriage” for two men or two women, just a creepy parody of the real thing, a kind of sick joke about how our culture has slid into the gutter. You can gloat about any sort of trashy arrangement being called “marriage.” When some farmer marries a nanny goat, the liberal cretins will probably celebrate it as a victory for “marriage equality.”

        God is “rejoicing over that union”? Too funny. Which god are you referring to? Not the one Christians worship.

    • Gus Ravenwheel says:

      I know I’m not Jay, but since the questions have been raised, may I take a stab at them? You’ve asked some very good questions and I think we all could benefit by prayerfully, rationally, grace-fully considering them…

      1) what is marriage?

      In the bible, this is not as straightforward as many of us might think. Marriage was men and women committing together to have children to populate the world, in the early creation stories. It included polygamy (which is culturally acceptable in that day and the Bible does not once condemn polygamy – not one time… in fact, God says God GAVE King David his many wives!), it included concubinism, it included killing the “enemy” and capturing their orphaned virgin daughters to take home and make them your wife (with the caveats that they had a month to mourn the murder of her parents and that, after a time period, if she still did not want to be your wife, she could be set free from that forced marriage), it included one man/one woman, it included arranged marriages… in short, biblical marriage included a great deal of cultural practices today that we would find horrifying, as well as some wonderful stories about how good marriage can be.

      So, what IS marriage? I think today, most of us would support the notion of marriage being a committed relationship between consenting adults, freely forged in love and fidelity and support. While many people balk at the notionn of two gay guys or two lesbian gals doing this, why not? There is no biblical prohibition for such an arrangement (and keeping in mind that there are biblical supports for polygamy, which was culturally acceptable at that time) and I can think of no rational, moral reason apart from the bias against any and all gay behavior to think it’s a bad thing (and indeed, there are many rational and moral reasons TO support it, as we’ll see…)

      2) the sinfulness, or not, of sexual intimacy outside of marriage

      Again, the bible is sort of loose on this point, giving us many examples of all sorts of relationships, including polygamy and concubinism and forced marriage of orphaned girls. Still, I would argue that the Bible – and good moral common sense – over all leans towards the healthiness and wholesomeness of keeping marriage within the context of a committed marriage relationship.

      3) how we define love/loving relationships

      Well, WE might define it in many ways. But I think Paul has some good suggestions: “Whatsoever things are good, whatsoever things are true, noble, right, pure, lovely and admirable, think on those things…” as a starting point. Or Paul’s “love” chapter, which says: “Love is patient, kind, not envious or boastful, not easily angered, rejoices in the truth… Love always protects, trusts, hopes and perseveres. Love never fails…”

      Relationships that are defined by these characteristics, I’d say, are obviously loving relationships. Could we agree to that?

      4) the New Testament directive for elders to be faithful to one spouse

      Yes, being faithful to one spouse is a good thing. In fact, it’s exactly what we’re calling for. We, on my “side” believe in marriage, that it IS good and healthy. It is a way of promoting the community, the family, the church, the society. Strong marriages – gay or straight – we believe to be a good and wonderful thing.

      Why specifically would we think otherwise?

      5) the meaning of chastity, fornication

      Chastity: Being sexually pure outside a marriage relationship.
      Fornication: being sexually impure outside of a marriage relationship.

      So, given that we are created as sexual creatures – created by God with sexual desires – why would we tell some group, “Oh, but YOU have to give up your sexual desires for your entire life…”? Why would we do that?

      I mean, rationally, we can see that obviously, if someone actually had inate sexual desires of a sort that were obviously harmful – pedophilia, rape, etc – THOSE obviously harmful sexual desires we can righteously demand MUST be set aside. But healthy, loving, committed sexual behavior inside a healthy marriage? What specific, practical reason would we have for discouraging that in the real world?


      • Nathaniel Torrey says:

        “So, given that we are created as sexual creatures – created by God with sexual desires – why would we tell some group, “Oh, but YOU have to give up your sexual desires for your entire life…”? Why would we do that?”

        Forgive me for the aside, but is it safe to say you are against monasticism as a vocation?

      • Gus Ravenwheel says:

        No, I fully support any individuals deciding for themselves, “This is God’s Path for me..” I oppose a forced monasticism.

        How about you? Is it safe to say you agree with me and stand opposed to forced monasticism? (ie, Me deciding for You, this is God’s will for you…)

      • Nathaniel Torrey says:

        If the only natural ends for human life are marriage between a man and a woman (I know we disagree on this) or the monastic life, then it seems the options are somewhat limited for someone who is irrevocably attracted to members of the same sex, whether that be naturally or habitually. This also goes for those attracted to the opposite sex: God does not call us to bachelorhood.

        Of course, all of these things, whether its getting married or becoming a nun or monk, must be chosen freely and without coercion. I’m merely stating what I think people ought to do.

      • Ben Welliver says:

        Nathaniel, marriage or monasticism are not the only two options for Christians. Most of us know bachelors and spinsters, many of them regular churchgoers, who lead reasonably happy lives, and certainly the NT presents the very live option of doing just that. Obviously the Christians in Corinth lived in a society similar to our own, with single people living promiscuously, yet Paul apparently knew of people (like himself) who could live in a culture like that a be neither married nor monastic. Churches have always benefitted from single people (women more than men, obviously) who put a lot of their time and energy into the church, also volunteer work, their siblings’ and neighbors’ kids, etc. Given that we are surrounded by round-the-clock sexual images in the media, it is not easy, and for most people probably not possible. I know many Christian singles who are still hoping to marry eventually, but who are not letting life pass them by in the meantime. (Mother Teresa comes to mind. Did she give the impression of being bitter and unhappy?) The idea of the church bestowing its blessing on two men or two women as couples is clearly a case of the church conforming itself to the world’s gutter standards. I’d like to see the churches put a more emphasis on “worldly monasticism,” training both marrieds and singles to maintain their moral standards in an immoral world.

    • Jeremy Baines says:

      This group of people doesn’t seem to have much interest in wiping out infectious diseases, as they seem to pass on a certain virus with wild abandon. Back when Reagan was prez, you heard them blaming Reagan for “our Holocaust,” as if it was Reagan who was infecting thousands of people. I have trouble thinking of a “gay community” when the members of that “community” have no conscience when it comes to infecting each other. I think it’s pretty obvious that the main reason they hate Christians is not our focus on morality, it’s because they can’t admit that their worst enemies are each other, so they have to project their hatred onto some other group. I get called a “hater” because I oppose same-sex “marriage,” but I’ve never passed on a life-altering disease to another human being, so I think my level of hate is much lower than some people I could point to. My message to the “community”: I’ll change my atttitude toward gays when you own up to the harm you’ve done to each other, but I know that’s never gonna happen because that would be adult behavior, not the behavior of selfish, pleasure-fixated adolescents.

      • Jay Bakker says:

        This my be the most hateful / ignorant comment I’ve ever read, I’m surprised the moderator allowed this one to go up… I’m done here.

      • Gus Ravenwheel says:


        This group of people doesn’t seem to have much interest in wiping out infectious diseases…

        Oh, it is horrible if someone deliberately passes on a disease (not that there is any evidence that this happens more with gay folk than straight folk, but setting aside that false suggestion for now…). Let’s see, what could we do to discourage passing on diseases? Oh, I know, how about encouraging faithful, monogamous loving marriage relationships?


      • Adrian C says:

        How can scientific data be “hateful/ignorant”? Facts are stubborn things. How is AIDS spread? No argument on that score. Back in the 1980s they spread the propaganda about the inevitable outbreak of AIDS in the heterosexual population, and even naive C. Everett Koop got on the bandwagon awhile. The hetero AIDS epidemic didn’t happen, except for the druggies. This is the elephant in the room that no one talks about, but everyone knows it’s there. When you hear that someone has AIDS, you immediately assume they are gay – and most are. Sweeping that under the rug won’t make it go away.

        I think this Jay buffoon posted enough comments to thoroughly establish his total lack of credibility as – well, as anything but an attention-seeking clown. His response to the “hateful/ignorant” comment pretty much puts the cherry on top of the sundae.

        Opinions can be “hateful/ignorant.” Facts can’t – they are NEUTRAL, data. Don’t ever let any liberal try to convince you that they are “rational” and pro-science. You see rather clearly that hard data – science – will get labeled “hateful/ignorant.” If someone said “lots of heavy smokers get lung cancer and emphysema” or “lots of alcoholics get cirrhoris,” is that “hateful/ignorant”? No, it’s fact, and everyone knows it. And the raw data on AIDS needs to be spoken, because, in case you hadn’t heard, people are still infecting each other. Does Revernd Jay Bakker think it’s a loving, compassionate thing to encourage or condone promiscuous sex? Even if you think it’s morally OK, it obviously isn’t OK medically. Do you want people you value as friends to spend the rest of their lives taking huge quanities of prescription drugs and fretting over their health? Most people would call it a loving act to want other people to be healthy.

        Feel free to sign off for good, Reverend Jay Bakker. If you intended to make a lasting impression, mission accomplished. You talk about your love and compassion for gays, and you’re too blind to ignore the raw, unadulterated scientific reality that a lot of those people are infecting a lot of others. Maybe you could show your love with a new message like “don’t feel you have to have sex with everyone you meet” or “if you know you’re HIV-positive, tell the other person – BEFORE, not afterward” or “if you have lots of sex partners, get yourself tested regularly, and don’t hide your status.” Has anyone heard of any of the gay-friendly churches, those “compassionate” congregations, getting those messages out to their gay members? Don’t we encourage smokers to stop, or alcoholics to drink in moderation? Is sex that sacred taht we can’t even suggest maybe, just maybe, doing it a little less often, and with fewer people?

  14. Bruce Cadle says:

    Hi Jay,

    First of all I completely disagree with your position. The Old Testament and New Testament clearly speak against homosexuality.

    Having said that I’m sorry that other Christians are attacking so so viciously here.

    Next Sunday I’m preaching on Radical Love. We’ll be looking at John 15-17.

    What saddens me is how bad we Christians treat each other. We can’t seem to be able to disagree but still love each other.


    Bruce Cadle

  15. Joey says:

    It’s interesting, to me, that so many people on here are talking about an inherency in the word of God… That it doesn’t change…

    What the hell are you all talking about?

    Of course it changes. We can only interpret ANYTHING by our own life experiences. And, just as societies change, our interpretation of things change (Uh, hello slavery and women’s rights).

    This thread is the exact reason I don’t call myself a Christian anymore. The “church” is bogged down with brainwashed morons who view their inflexibility as standing firm, when really it’s just automated, conditioned responses to stimuli. Use your brain. If you think God is boundless, all-knowing, and Creator, then surely there must be MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more to life than just what you think the bible says about certain topics.

    You’re allowed to change your mind. Contradict yourself. RESEARCH. Here Jay is, someone who has spent YEARS studying and talking about homosexuality; he’s making valid points and offering hope to those (like me) who are gay and have given up on the Church. Your responses? Jay’s wrong. He isn’t well-studied. He did this and that at this festival and said this in his book and on TV. Just stop. Consider what he’s saying. Actually research yourself what the bible truly says about the verses you use when you condemn homosexuality.

    I respect Jay. I think he offers new sight on an age-old command: Love one another.

    I was at the festival when Jay talked about holding the hand of the girl who’s getting an abortion. He was saying this during a time when there were four MAJOR bad things in Christian world that you shouldn’t do: Drink, smoke, cuss, and have an abortion. The church was so freaked out by someone going through with an abortion, to the point of alienation and freakishly major condemnation, that he was basically saying, “Look, it’s not my job to force anyone to do anything. All I can do is be here for people in love and tell them the truth in love. It doesn’t mean I’m going to abandon them because they don’t do what I want them to do.”

    I’m gay. I prayed a countless number of times for God to get rid of it. I’ve cried a countless number of tears because I wanted to just die. All of this because I was taught being gay was wrong. When I finally committed to actually studying the topic myself, I found tremendous hope and freedom. I don’t want to kill myself anymore.

    Reading all these comments from you all is bringing me back to a place of sadness. We’re all so lost and have no idea what love really is, but for some reason feel the need to speak in absolutes and condescension. We’re all defensive because we feel like we’re right, but the truth doesn’t need to be defended. Truth will be truth whether you believe it or not?

    You know those churches in the 50s and 60s that didn’t think it was okay to marry outside of race? Remember those country clubs that wouldn’t allow Jews to join? You’re joining those churches and those country clubs.

    • If you stay in that sin Joey, you my friend will die lost.

      • Joey says:

        What sin? Not being like you? Or, understanding Spirit doesn’t discriminate against gender? Or, choosing to love myself for who I’ve become through prayer and counsel? Or, searching for truth that I can’t even begin to comprehend? Or, being a part of something that has not just been fed to me?

        I don’t believe I’m lost at all, and the fact that you know very little of me, yet can call me lost, is exactly the kind of spiritual bullying I’m glad I’m not a part of anymore.

      • Gus Ravenwheel says:

        Ignore him, Joey. God has not died and placed Christopher in charge.

        For we are saved by God’s grace, Joey, not by the approval of petty humankind.

        Jesus was routinely called “lost” – and worse – by the religious zealots in his time, too. These pharisees also read the Scriptures but missed the meaning. Those who live by the graceless word, die by the graceless word.

        Embrace grace.


    • Adrian C says:

      Regarding the silly reference to Jews being excluded from country clubs: I cannot fathom why anyone would wish to belong to a club that doesn’t want them. I mean, what is going through your mind? I can’t imagine being a Jew and thinking “I really want to be part of that club that excludes us.” The sane response would be “Sheesh, what a bunch of snobbish creeps, I don’t want to socialize with THEM.” Ditto for the gay thing, either in churches of the Boy Scouts. You want to belong to some group that has excluded you — why? Logically you would AVOID people like that. You think Christians are mean and prejudiced? Great – stay the heck away from them, shake the dust off your feet. Do you notice any straight people clamoring to hang around gay bars or gay social groups? Do you notice whites yearning to be included in a black or Hispanic social club?

      What a sick society we live in, neurotic and unhappy people whining about being excluded. Get a life. Start your own groups, exclude Christians if you want to, exclude Boy Scouts, excluded heterosexuals. If you think the public has turned in your favor, cool, start the Gay Scouts or something like that, show some moxie, this is America, create a new association instead of whining and moaning about those nasty old straight Christians.

      Here’s a news flash: Neither the Bible nor the Constitution guarantee that you will go through life and never feel excluded or offended. Your boohooing is tiresome.

      • Gus Ravenwheel says:

        A little “separate but equal” solution?

        For some of us, it’s a matter of justice and we believe God cares about justice and that we should be fighting for justice. “Neurotic and unhappy” have nothing to do with it.

        But believe what you want. Don’t let facts get in your way.

      • Joey says:

        I’m not afraid of exclusion or offense. I never said that. I just don’t understand how a group of people can claim to have the source of ultimate freedom and creativity, yet are so bound to traditions and ideals.

        My point about the country clubs might have been missed. Of course it’s silly to say that NOW, but there were perfectly well-intentioned individuals who thought it would be best if Jews didn’t hang around them. There were sweet individuals who found perfect sense in not marrying outside of race. The point is, folks who are so opposed to homosexuality are just repeating the same bigotry that’s been expressed only 50 years ago. All these reasons and justifications of why homosexuality is wrong will be laughable one day to the majority of Christians, because it already is to some now.

        I don’t want to start any new group. I think “groups” are the problem. Herd behavior is so weird and scary, especially when it comes to outcasting tendencies.

        I don’t call myself a Christian anymore, but I do believe in Christ. I do believe He offers a hope that passes our understanding of how things should work.

        I’m not boohooing, because I’m not a victim anymore. But, I do think it’s valid, especially looking back on my teenage years, to express that small-minded Christianity is DEADLY.

      • Joey says:

        And, Christopher, I’m not a Corinthian. Paul wasn’t writing to me. And I’m not forcing younger men to have sex with me based on a cultural tradition. I think it would be wiser to reflect on Jesus’ teachings (you know, the entire cornerstone of what you believe): “The one who has no sin can cast the first stone.” I don’t think any of us have any business throwing any stones. And, you know, they were throwing those stones to kill. Words kill, and words are sprung from the heart.

        It seems like you’re taking pleasure in your belief that I will go to hell because I’m gay. I hope you can one day be more sensitive to how you express your beliefs through scripture.

  16. bravelass says:


    I’m sorry you chose to use someone else’s response as an excuse to bail on substantive engagement. You offered nothing but the snark and judgment you claim to deplore.

    But then, I won’t say I’m surprised. It’s a rare homosexual man that can be honest about the depth of depravity that exists in that community.

    • Gus Ravenwheel says:

      This is funny. I have given you a substantive engagement and you opt not to engage or acknowledge it at all. “Bravelass?”

      It takes no bravery to run from responsible adult arguments and instead rely upon cheap and false stereotypes. Repent, and embrace a bit of bravery. And a bit of grace.

      It’s good stuff, that grace by which we are saved. Try it out in your own life sometime.


  17. Ben Garren says:

    I have been transformed by Jay’s books and sermons. I have met him once. It was at a conference. I was so overwhelmed to be in his presence that I cannot even remember if I had the courage at that moment to shake his hand. I should have said something then, but I am going to say it now.

    Jay Baker leads a life that is an Icon for Jesus Christ the Good Shepherd. He searches, loves, and cares for the sheep that are lost, the sheep the Church would like to see stay lost. Sheep like me. Every time I hear his story, of everything he risked and lost, for my sake and those like me… when he did not have to… I am at a loss except for one thing: whatever that man is on, whoever that man is following, whatever makes him tick… count me in. Jay’s living testimony points me to Christ, points me to pick up my Bible, points me to get down on my knees and bring my life fully to God.

    His life does so in a way that no witness of condemnation from those who dictate with complete surety the will of God ever has. Such individuals have been condemning me my entire life, as I have forever been the wrong type of Christian, an Episcopalian. The fact that I am gay only added more fuel to the fire. This bothered me for a while then I realized that it put me in pretty good company, the company of most people who identified as Christian throughout history.

    I could extrapolate on the nature of sexuality based on Thomist theologies. Quote the love poetry St. John of the Cross wrote where he becomes the effeminate partner to God’s sexual advances (following biblical forms). Systematically go through the history from the time of Jesus onward of not taking the Bible literally. It would not matter because every one I could quote would simply be stamped as “condemned”. But this condemning does not matter, either.

    Jesus matters. God’s Grace matters. Living a life that embodies God’s Grace and Jesus ministry matters. Interacting, listening, and being transformed by the Community of Christ past, present, and future matters. The condemnation of one sub group of Christians who refuse to enter into intentional community does not matter.

    I might say that being condemned so might be some badge of honor. It is not, however, for me. It is simply a great sadness. I am certain that an actual relationship of love in Christ with those who condemn me could bring me and my condemners closer to God. Those who condemn me, however, do not feel I am capable of such except on their terms… so it will not happen.

    I rest in the midst of the Christian Community that is ready to listen when I talk about how Jesus’ love transforms my life, that will let me move with them in the ministry of the Holy Spirit, that every day calls me to be more and more the individual God seeks for me to be. This is a community that is alive and well and with leaders like Jay in our midst we are not going any where any time soon.

    • J S Lang says:

      You refer to yourself as “one of the sheep the Church would like to see stay lost.” In all my years of attending various denominations and reading lots of Christian books, not once have I heard any Christian say that some people should “stay lost,” or that God didn’t care about certain groups, or that we ought to take pleasure in someone being lost. If you want to attack the Church while you’re praising some publicity glutton like Jay Bakker, that is your right, but your smear of the Church is completely wrong. No Christian wants to see someone lost. Bakker discovered that instead of preaching the hard message of “repent and turn to God,” it’s much easier to say “God loves you just as you are, and if your lifestyle is clearly condemned in the Bible, well, then the Bible is wrong!” Naturally you find that message congenial. It’s Jay Bakker’s made-up religion, but it’s not Christianity. Ours is not a religion about feeling good about your sins, it’s about getting rid of them, or at least making the effort. If you like Bakker and his type, that’s cool. If you like his spiteful, vicious postings about this article, well, you have a pastor you deserve. I see nothing even remotely Christlike in venomous postings. it appears that in his theology, the place of Satan has been taken by evangelical Christians.

      • Ben Garren says:

        Historically there are two major methods of missionary activity to those considered outside the Christian flock. One methodology requires the potential convert to completely relinquish religious, cultural, and ethnic identity and take on fully the identities of the proselytizer. Any thing that relates to the initial culture must be lost and stay lost. The idea is that one has to “humanize” then “civilize” then “evangelize” the potential convert. This method continues to be used throughout the world on a regular basis, and sometimes it works. The horror stories from Aboriginal Schools in Australia and Canada, however, attest to its major problems. The full eradication of the LGBTQ culture from the planet is an active part of many Christian’s message. “Ex-Gay ministries” hinge upon this very ideal. The theology behind this form holds that God comes to the other group of people with the proselytizer.

        The other methodology rests on the idea that God is active and presently working in the midst of all cultures, ethnicities, and religions but this working must be clarified and connected with the Truth of the Gospel. This form of missionary work involves translation of the Bible into native languages, the allowance for the native culture to formulate their own worship and liturgies, and thus discover the Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ in their midst. This is the form of mission that Augustine was sent to do in Britain, that the Jesuit Francis Xavier promoted for use is Asia, and at many other points in Christian Tradition. It is this same model that Jay appears to be working from.

        Now Christian History is resplendently full of one group of Christians calling another group of Christians the anti-christ and servants of Satan. I do not really go in for that because I think we are all struggling and wrestling through the same muddle and at points our best intentions lead to bad ends. Sadly the actions of many Christians in America, often well intended, have brought about a cultural phenomena where Jesus is considered to be an arbiter of hate and vengeance and to be his follower means to hate science and denounce everyone who is not christian as evil. The terms “Jesus” and “Christian” no longer point to the realities to which they are intended but to substandard idols. Jays work is attempting to overcome this problem and in so doing he must denounce the problematic, if well intended, actions that brings this phenomena about.

        God does love me just as I am. I am not one to think that any set of actions or works I do or don’t do brings about my salvation or makes me worthy of God’s love. My very breath, much more my Salvation, is inherently dependent upon God’s grace. I am in full need of transformation and further conformity to God’s will. I sin, I confess, I sin again, and God keeps coming back at me with love.

        The difference is that I do that in the midst of community that walks in faith towards a Truth, that of Jesus, they recognize is beyond their comprehension and calling them to ever greater things and ever more abundant life. I do not do that in a community that has faith in a truth they claim to know fully that cannot be questioned.

        And yes Jay is snarky. I can get snarky as well. The generation before ours perfected the ability to say everything nicely so that no one could take offense when something offensive was said. The fact that he is edgy, says stuff that makes me roll my eyes, and needs to take a breath every once in a while is what helps make him real. Polite, clean cut, white washed pastors who repeat old platitudes… now those worry me.

      • Dan H says:

        I know just what you mean. I won’t even listen to a pastor until he peels his shirt off and has at least 48 percent tattoo coverage. What a stupid way to size up a pastor – white guy in a suit, must be a BAD guy.

        “The full eradication of the LGTBQ culture from the planet is an active part of many Christians’ message.” That has to be one of the stupidest and most paranoid sentences a human being ever wrote. Did you fail to notice that of the many postings on this particular article, no one hinted at “full eradication”? Is this the typical conspiracy theory – there’s no actual evidence that this “full eradication” is being planned, but the lack of evidence shows just how sneaky those Christians are. By all means, please give us some links or quotes or something so we can get educated in the “many Christians” who desire the “full eradication” of the LGTBQ culture.

        Or, would the opposition to gay marriage serve as evidence? It isn’t, but the paranoid left has made an art form of turning molehills into mountains.

        I really do pity you, seriously, if your cohorts and people like Bakker choose to believe such tripe. FYI, Christians don’t obsess over gays near as much as gays obsess over Christians. We probably would give the subject no thought at all, except we look around and see ourselves slandered as “haters” because we are pro-family and have a moral code that differs from the world’s. If the gay “culture” as you call it wasn’t constantly in our face (and churches, and media, and halls of Congress), we’d pay little attention to your “culture.” Aside from the fact that we have much better things to do than plot “full eradication,” we wouldn’t do it if we could, because we don’t want to. But hey, don’t believe us – I mean, your friends and your pitiful excuse for a “pastor” told you we’re planning “full eradication,” believe them – I mean, they can read our minds, can’t they? And if the hate isn’t there, pretend it is anyway.

        Paranoia, by the way, has been called the emotion that the loveless cling to. When love isn’t there, fear will give your life meaning, especially if you can join in a community rooted in paranoia. Nice illusion, but not even remotely near the truth.

        To use a famous Bakkerism, Christians are PTL – People That Love.

      • Ben Garren says:

        Most Sundays I am a white guy in a suit. Except when I preach then I am generally wearing a cassock and surplice. I definitely make mistakes and have my “bad guy” moments, but as far as I know this is not because of my race or my choice in clothing.

        Note, however, that I said “white washed” not white. I was referencing the type of pastor who puts up a perfect unblemished front and never revels what is beneath. These type of pastors worry me because I have no idea if what they present is solid wood or a cheap veneer.

        Now I have my fair share of fear but my relationship with God is forever transforming it into a deeper love. I am also fully aware that, outside of a few outstanding exceptions, most Christians are not sitting around plotting the down fall of the LGBTQ community. You are very correct that Christians are people that love.

        I have never been one to ascribe Christians who respond negatively to homosexuality to be acting out of hate. I am quite certain they are acting out of love. The response to homosexuality is the same response to drug addiction. Just as Christians, in love, seek to eradicate the debilitating cultural phenomena of drug addiction so they seek to eradicate the debilitating cultural phenomena of homosexuality. For most Christians these are side line problems that do not directly affect their day to day lives. On the rare moments when these phenomena do present themselves they respond according to their beliefs and quickly go about their life of faith as normal.

        For the drug addict or the homosexual individual, however, every interaction with a Christian is such a moment. Moments that for the Christian are passing and inconsequential are defining of Christianity for the other involved. The end result is that for both the drug addict and the homosexual individual the message is clear: Christianity does not support drug addiction/homosexuality and within proper Christian Culture neither would exist.

        Now for the drug addicted individual these acts of love can bring about a state of recovery that the individual, every Christian group I know of, medical doctors, and society in general recognize is beneficial and good.

        In the case of the homosexual individual, however, these acts of love do not result in a state that holds the same level of credibility. In fact these acts of love can bring about an exceptionally negative state for the individual involved. Experience of this reality followed by prayer as well as biblical and theological reflection have brought some to question the fruits brought about by such acts of love. Further discernment have brought many to the conclusion that while the love is good the acts promoted by it or not.

        The end result is a denouncement of calling homosexuality a debilitating cultural phenomena as well as a denouncement of its exclusion from the christian process of sanctifying sexuality within the context of marriage. In other words a statement that Christianity should no longer seek the eradication of homosexuality from society in the way it seeks an eradication of sin from society.

        This is not a wholesale condoning of every aspect of the LGBTQ culture. Just because the church allows Heterosexual individuals to marry does not mean that it condones every aspect of heterosexual culture, quite the contrary in fact. It is simply a statement that sexuality is sanctified through a well ordered life long monogamous relationship under God between two individuals who can love each other fully, with their physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual selves.

        All the Christians involved are working out of love, faith, and biblical and theological reflection. Some of those, for whom the issue of homosexuality is not just a passing interest of no major day to day concern, in the midst of this love, faith, and biblical and theological reflection, have been brought on their journey with Christ to question and stand against the status quo treatment of homosexual individuals. In doing so they face that very same status quo treatment by their fellow Christians.

        What then occurs is what we generally see playing out in this very comment section. Christians not entering into love, prayer, and biblical and theological reflection with each other but instead claiming full knowledge of God’s will, denouncing each other, and calling each other names for a short moment of self satisfaction.

        Please pity me, please pity us all… we are all sad wretched creatures in need of God’s transforming grace.

  18. Nathaniel Torrey says:

    Alright guys, this has become a racket of clanging cymbals (1 Corinthians 13:1). If you don’t start elevating the dialogue here and showing some basic civility towards each other, we’ll start weeding out comments. This is your only warning.

  19. Mark Grizzard says:

    Hooray for your 2 days of fame and attention. Now, to other things…..

    • Dan H says:

      You’re referring to Jay “Sodomophilia” Bakker? He was loving the attention. Probably saves every web page that mentions his name.

      You do have to feel for him, given the family situation. Pretty embarrassing to have a breakfast cereal named after your mother.

  20. connieneu says:

    Hi Jay..I AM very Sad and Angry at the hateful so called Christians and pagans…The know it Alls..The Brilliant Minds.The My Way Is Right..I read your testimony life story from one of Your books..I wanted 2 say Hi and I hope You are doing OK.. God Bless and Protect You..Love from Connie in Minnesota..Count It All Joy Brother..

    • God’s word never changes. It’s not my opinion that counts, it’s God’s word that is the final authority and that authority denounces sodomites! God condemns the actions of homos and their deviant behavior into everlasting torment.

      • Ben Garren says:

        The Bible, in Ezekiel, identifies the sin of Sodom as being pride, too much food, undisturbed peace, and the failure to help the poor and needy. Oddly no where does the Bible identify the sin of sodom as being consensual sex between adult males. A literal reading of the story of the angel’s visitation speaks only against the gang raping of male guests to a city, the story even suggests that the gang raping of a teenage female citizen of the city would be a saving act for the city.

        A literal interpretation of the unchanging word of God in relationship to sodom allows a believer to denounce men gang raping male guests, pride, gluttony, taking ones own needs above others, and refusal to help the poor and needy.

        Use of it to denounce consensual same sex relations is a non-literal interpretation of the text and an opinion of some individuals based on an extrapolation.

  21. […] Read about Jay Bakker saying that he believes that “heterosexism is probably going to be the death blow to the American Evangelical church” and that he doesn’t “believe 100% of the Bible” (ht: Russell Moore). […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *