With the use of commonly understood running and baking concepts, Paul deals with the issue of allowing false teaching into the church. First, Paul uses the idea of running in a race to explain the seriousness of someone or something hindering or blocking a disciple of Christ from following Him. Paul compares the current spiritual state of the Galatian church to their previously ongoing spiritual progress with the phrase, “you were.” With the rhetorical question, “who cut in on you to keep you from obeying the truth?” he is both claiming that someone has interrupted their running and that they are no longer obeying the truth. Notice the focus on someone and not something. The word here for the phrase “cut in on you to keep you” or ἐνέκοψεν means to “cut into/hinder/thwart/interrupt.” So, Paul suggests that someone has cut in front of them in their race and stopped them from obeying further. It is clear that whoever cut them off was not from God and their efforts were πεισμονὴ, or “deception, persuasion.”
Second, Paul also uses the commonly understood axiom, “A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough.” Paul repeats this to his first letter to the church in Corinth with “Don’t you know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough?” (1 Corinthians 5:6b). With this, he makes it evident that just a “little” bit of false teaching will eventually negatively influence the entire church.
To the churches in Corinth and Galatia, Paul instructs them that there are consequences to those who spread false teaching. He reminds the Galatians, “The one who is throwing you into confusion, whoever that may be, will have to pay the penalty.” (Galatians 5:10b) To the Corinthians, Paul uses an often repeated phrase from the Old Testament to specifically delineate between the sinners outside the church and those false teachers from within the church:
But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”
1 Corinthians 5:11-13
The command to “Expel the wicked person from among you” echoes a similar phrase from Deuteronomy 13:5; 17:7; 19:19; 21:21; 22:21,24 and 24:7, “You must purge the evil from among you.” The phrase here, וּבִֽעַרְתָּ or “you must purge” literally means to burn up/consume/destroy/remove. Paul repeats this command with ἐξάρατε or “expel” meaning to take away/remove from a place. Clearly, we are to identify false teaching and those who teach it and then remove them and no longer associate with them again.
A deeper look into the recent plagiarism scandal regarding Litton reveals how false teaching has crept into the church. It has been widely accepted, even by Litton, that he actually did plagiarized many of his sermons. What is not widely accepted or even addressed is the actual content of these sermons is obvious false teaching. The fact of plagiarism, itself remaining an obvious sin of theft and one of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:15), is often focused upon while the false content of the messages remain overlooked or ignored. On January 26, 2019, J.D. Greear preached from the book of Romans, “How the Fall Affects Us All.” Litton preached a plagiarized version on January 27, 2020. It was Reformation Charlotte that reported on this on June 21, 2021. (“Like Greear, New SBC President Says the Bible ‘Whispers’ about Homosexuality.” Reformationcharlotte.Org. Last modified June 21, 2021. Accessed August 21, 2021. https://reformationcharlotte.org/2021/06/21/like-greear-new-sbc-president-says-the-bible-whispers-about-homosexuality/) Soon after, on June 28, 2021, Bookman posted an online video demonstrating glaring plagiarism from Litton. (“Litton and Greear: Borrowing or Plagiarism?” Youtube, June 28, 2021. Last modified June 28, 2021. Accessed August 21, 2021. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6PJNfbIuS4) Sadly, in an interview with WKRG News 5 on July 6, 2021, Litton declared these public allegations of plagiarism from specific entities were from “unnamed sources.” (Bill Riales. “The New Southern Baptist Convention President from Saraland Hopes to Bridge Chasms.” WKRG News 5. Last modified July 7, 2021. Accessed August 21, 2021. https://www.wkrg.com/news/the-new-southern-baptist-convention-president-from-saraland-hopes-to-bridge-chasms/.)
On July 6, 2021, Litton addressed the plagiarism and ignored any suggestion of false teaching in a lengthy interview with Jonathan Howe of Baptist Press. (“An Interview with SBC President Ed Litton” 2021. Biblical Recorder. July 6, 2021. https://www.brnow.org/news/an-interview-with-sbc-president-ed-litton/) During this interview, Litton’s assertions provide insights into how false teaching can even invade a seeming apology for sin and turn it into a mere rationalization of even the most glaringly obvious public displays of admitted sin.
First, Litton claims that he had “permission” from Greear and that “makes it look even more similar.” Greear agreed that he gave such permission in a blog post on June 26, 2021 (less than a week from the original allegations) and gave details about a conversation he had with Litton about using his material:
I told him that whatever bullets of mine worked in his gun, to use them! My own take on these kinds of things is usually shaped by the input of many godly men and women. Ed and I have been friends for many years and we have talked often about these matters, and I was honored that he found my presentation helpful.
Greear, J. D. June 26, 2021. “A Statement about My Sermon on Romans 1.” Jdgreear.Com. Accessed August 20, 2021. https://jdgreear.com/a-statement-about-my-sermon-on-romans-1/.
Second, although there is video evidence that his actual presentation is also patterned after Greear’s presentation, Litton insists that he only referenced these Greear sermons:
A lot of them, I didn’t really even listen to. I would go straight to his written notes that he provides. And so yes, very much like a commentary in that sense and, and know as well, when you listen to R. Kent Hughes or when you read R. Kent Hughes’ commentaries and you listen to a sermon like on Gospel Coalition, you’ll find that his commentaries are going right out of that sermon work, which is understandable.
“An Interview with SBC President Ed Litton.”
Third, Litton further claims that he does not perform the majority of sermon preparation at this his church. A team conducts that preparation at meetings:
A lot of times we get out of that meeting with a very clear outline or illustrations. And then we finish the rest of the week, building that out for whoever the preachers are going to be. And again, I lead that process because I am discipling young preachers.
“An Interview with SBC President Ed Litton.”
Lastly, Litton insists that his real motivation for plagiarism was discipleship:
The real motivation behind this was discipleship. It’s helping raise up a new generation of pastors and leaders who can communicate the Gospel and it has had an extraordinary impact. And the reverse part for me is that it helps me keep my voice young and preaching too, because we’re always trying to reach a new generation with the Gospel. And so for us, it’s been a very healthy process and over the few years that we’ve done it, and I think we’ve been doing about five or six years now, it’s really improved the quality of preaching, especially among these young people.
“An Interview with SBC President Ed Litton.”
Sadly, Litton offers a half-hearted sort of what is perceived to be an apology. A deeper look into the offer reveals further excuses for the sin while subversively blaming those identifying the sin as the real perpetrators:
And I just want to say, I apologize to anybody who has been offended, and rightly so, and hurt. And some of the things that have been represented in such a way, but I’m not denying that that we borrowed these things. And I want to say this too. I’m asked by good people and good-willed people. Why didn’t you just credit J.D.? But I want you to hear my heart. This is not an excuse or justification. I am sorry. I did not.
“An Interview with SBC President Ed Litton.”
Litton then immediately told about a fellow seminary student who cited everything (even illustrations) and the professor said, “’When a diamond miner goes looking for diamonds, he doesn’t hold up the pick and the shovel, he holds up the diamond.’” Litton immediately clarified with the following:
Now, please hear my heart, Jonathan. I am not excusing myself or explaining. I’m just explaining my heart. I love my people. And I want them to see Jesus. He is the diamond. This has opened my eyes, and it’s opened concerns. And will I do it differently? I promise you I will do it differently.
“An Interview with SBC President Ed Litton.”
A promise to “do it differently”? Do what differently? If he had “permission,” then why apologize? He justifies using a team approach for the sake of disciplining young pastors, and still does. What will be done “differently” since he claims citation is not an issue due to “permission,” team sermon preparation is misunderstood and people seem to have been “offended” and “hurt”? Who knows, but Litton subtly reveals his suggestion to fix this so-called strife caused by those who are criticizing his plagiarism and his motivations: “I applaud the people who are trying to do this, and there are good people trying to bring a civility to this on Twitter and other social media. We need to learn how to be civil in our conversation because, well, for a lot of reasons, because Christ commands it.” Litton claims we need to stop this strife because “the world is watching this.”
The hallmark of scriptural debate conversation among believers is honor, first, respect for one another listening without condemnation, Romans 8:1, we need to assume the best of each other and leave room for repentance. When there is a need for genuine repentance the assumptions on each other’s hearts are just wrong, and we need to humble ourselves with that, but we need to engage in hard conversations, but we have to develop the skills of being able to do so for two primary reasons. One is, how we talk to our brothers and sisters reflects Jesus and what He’s doing in our hearts, but there is a public witness at stake. So I’m not saying we don’t talk about hard things and we don’t confront painful things, but I’m saying we do so with humility, always aware that what people are watching it matters.
“An Interview with SBC President Ed Litton.”
So, Litton’s refutation of the allegations of plagiarism are at best, confusing. He acknowledges the allegation of plagiarism from specific entities then claims they are from anonymous sources. Why blatantly ignore specific claims from identifiable persons? He claims he did plagiarize but he had permission. Why admit you stole something and then claim you had permission to use it? He claims he did not copy the presentation of the material contrary to video evidence. Why attempt to contradict observable evidence? He claims others conducted the bulk of his sermon preparation. Why attempt to blame others for any perceived errors in sermons he is ultimately responsible for researching and presenting? He claims his real motivation is the discipleship of younger ministers. Why use the virtue of discipleship (or any virtue) to justify or otherwise attempt to clarify a blatantly obvious public sin? All of this remains a smokescreen to distract us from the actual presentation of false teaching from one pastor then specifically and intentionally repeated by another.
If we pay attention here, Litton is insisting that people merely leave the issue of his plagiarism alone for the sake of proclaiming the Gospel to the world. Basically, Litton insists on sacrificing truth for tone. Seriously? While claiming we need to “talk about hard things: and “confront painful things” on the one hand, he simultaneously claims we must do so “with humility.” He also insists that we “assume the best of each other” and “leave room for repentance.” Ok, so then, REPENT! Litton desires to avoid any consequences for his plagiarism and for all of those who challenge him on it to remember sinners are watching his being confronted and we are damaging our credibility among these sinners in the mere fact that we are confronting each other regarding sin. Basically, Litton insists that tone should replace truth and we merely move on here for the sake of reaching sinners with the Gospel. Litton suggests the Gospel is devoid of repentance and being a Christian does not carry any additional accountability for your thoughts and actions. Basically, the assertion is to ignore the wolf and allow the wolf to carry on with business and usual.
A detailed view into the wisdom found in James 3:1-6 reveals how important it remains why we should not ignore seemingly “small” actions of the human tongue, as seen through Litton’s flippant apology and blatant disregard for accountability and repentance for leadership:
Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. We all stumble in many ways. Anyone who is never at fault in what they say is perfect, able to keep their whole body in check. When we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we can turn the whole animal. Or take ships as an example. Although they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are steered by a very small rudder wherever the pilot wants to go. Likewise, the tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts. Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark. The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole body, sets the whole course of one’s life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell.
So, Litton is signaling that we should all ignore his public fire-building use of his tongue and move on from a further view into his plagiarism.
Although we can clearly demonstrate the danger of Litton’s plagiarism and his lack of personal accountability and repentance (and we do not diminish it), we must analyze the actual content of his plagiarism. The actual content and the seeming disregard for the false teaching found within reveals a deeper problem within the church that allows the wolf to roam unrestrained. An analysis of key statements from merely one sermon reveals how the original sermon remained largely unaddressed but Litton’s repetition of its false content was also largely ignored and became diminished in focusing on the plagiarism aspect.
Regarding homosexuality, both Greear and Litton make assertions that at first glance appear “nice” but reveal themselves as statements clearly antithetical to Scripture. In the earlier referenced “Litton and Greear” video, Greear says, “Homosexuality does not send you to hell. You know how I know that? Because heterosexuality does not send you to heaven.” Litton also says: “Homosexuality does not send people to hell. How do I know that? Because heterosexuality doesn’t send people to heaven.” (“Litton and Greear: Borrowing or Plagiarism?” Youtube, June 28, 2021. Last modified June 28, 2021. Accessed August 21, 2021. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6PJNfbIuS4, 6:07) Just a brief scan of Scripture reveals the egregious error proclaimed here.
(1) Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 call homosexuality detestable.
(2) Leviticus 18:29 demands that anyone engaging in any form of sexual perversion “be cut off from their people.”
(3) Romans 1:25-29 calls homosexuality “shameful” and “unnatural”:
They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.
- 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 specifically refutes that homosexuality identity by asserting that it is a sin that can be repented from and forgiven:
Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
- 2 Corinthians 7:2 clearly insists sex is restricted to marriage and between a man and a woman only: “But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.”
- Jude 1:7 clearly reflects on the total destruction of the entire cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19) was because of their “sexual immorality and perversion.”
- Mark 10:6-9 clearly records Jesus saying that God made man, “male and female.”
- Matthew 5:27-28 clearly records Jesus enhancing the meaning of one of the Ten Commandments prohibiting adultery (Exodus 20:14) to include any lustful thought.
So, Scripture is clear on this issue. God created humanity as either male or female. Any sexual act, whether thought or performed, outside the bounds of marriage between a man and a woman is detestable to God. Any of these sins can be repented from and forgiven.
Greear and Litton have clearly presented false doctrine. Greear’s original sermon makes additional false claims. While referring to Paul’s listing of homosexuality among such sins as deceit, greed and rebelliousness, Greear makes two alarmingly contradictory statements. First, he asserts, “Paul lists homosexuality as simply one corruption among many.” (“Messages.” Summitchurch.Com. Accessed September 4, 2021. https://summitchurch.com/message/how-the-fall-affects-us-all. 27:06) He clarifies this with the analogy of a parent concerned with a child who has a same-sex attraction with the warning, “You outta be worried that they have a rebellious attitude toward authority, cuz in God’s book that’s every bit the same.” (“Messages,” 27:28) Second, he claims, “I mean in terms of frequency or mention or the passion with which Paul talks about it, it would appear that quite a few other sins are more egregious in God’s eyes than homosexuality.” (“Messages,” 28:00)
Some would argue that since Jesus does not mention homosexuality directly, that somehow, legitimizes it. Well, Jesus did not specifically mention bestiality, pedophilia, incest, masturbation, necromancy, masochism, voyeurism, etc. Still, He would clearly NOT condone them and neither would the majority of those advocating for His “silence” on homosexuality. As already demonstrated, Jesus clearly states marriage is between a man and a woman and all humanity was created as either male or female.
Some would also argue that confronting those professing to be part of the LGBTQ+AF community is somehow “mean” or disrespectful to their “identity.: Nathan confronts David in 2 Samuel 12-13 about his affair with Uriah’s wife Bathsheba, the resulting pregnancy and the murder of Uriah and subsequent cover-ups. Was Nathan being bigoted and disrespectful of the rights of adulterers and murderers? Of course not! But in a weird twist of Scripture, that is exactly what those espousing the false teaching presented here by Greear and Litton are suggesting- leave those people in their sin because confronting them is wrong. Seriously? Bible-believing Christians must not tolerate this. 1 Thessalonians 4:3-8 insists that the instruction from Scripture on why sexual deviance is a sin and how to deal with it are not from human thoughts or opinions but are from God and must not be ignored:
It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control your own body.in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the pagans, who do not know God; and that in this matter no one should wrong or take advantage of a brother or sister. The Lord will punish all those who commit such sins, as we told you and warned you before. For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life. Therefore, anyone who rejects this instruction does not reject a human being but God, the very God who gives you his Holy Spirit.
Another crucial point found within this particular plagiarized sermon is Greear’s quotation of Jen Wilkin, which is a false representation of a quote from R.C. Sproul. While Greear references Wilkin without attribution to the original quote to address her inaccurate citation, Litton plagiarizes Greear without attribution to Greear, Wilkin or Sproul.
Greear acknowledges Wilkin as “one of our favorite Bible teachers.” (“Messages,” 28:11) Greear then quotes Jen Wilkin as saying, “We ought to whisper about what the Bible whispers about and we outta shout about what it shouts about and the Bible appears more to whisper when it comes to sexual sin compared to its shouts about materialism and religious pride.” (“Messages,” 28:11) While Greear does not verbally cite the origin of Wilkin’s quote, footnote #11 of the transcript of this sermon (“Messages) ,as well as Greear’s June 26, 2021 “A Statement about My Sermon on Romans 1,” (J. D. Greear. June 26, 2021. “A Statement about My Sermon on Romans 1″) reveals she is quoting Sproul.
A brief look into Sproul’s original use of “whispers” and “shouts” demonstrates that Wilkin uses the same level of careful attention to detail in quoting others as she does with her inaccurate presentation of Scripture. After learning this, it becomes increasingly obvious that Greear’s definition of “favorite Bible teacher” is sorely deficient. Litton’s use of and the overall public inattention paid to all of this nonsense is disturbing.
In his 2001 book with Robert Wolgemuth, What’s in the Bible: The Story of God through Time & Eternity, Spoul made his comments on “whispers” and “shouts” in relation to two topics. First, regarding concept of a literal six day creation, Sproul claims the Bible is clear:
Thoughtful and convincing arguments among Bible scholars swirl around the exact amount of time God used in creation. Were the six “days” of creation a form of poetry and symbolism, or were they literally twenty-four-hour days? I certainly encourage you to join me in the exploration of this issue. However, as I have done with my students over the years, I find that it is always dangerous to shout where God has whispered. Either way, the Bible is crystal-clear as to the Who” of creation, and ultimately that will have to be enough.
R. C. Sproul and Robert Wolgemuth. What’s in the Bible: The Story of God through Time & Eternity. Nashville, TN: Word Publishing, 2001, 4.
Second, in reference to eschatology, he refers to his earlier statement regarding creation:
As I said in the first chapter regarding the “how” of creation, I have believed that a Bible student should be careful not to “shout” when God “whispers.” And, when God “shouts,” to pay careful attention. In Revelation, we find God both whispering and shouting.
R. C. Sproul and Robert Wolgemuth. What’s in the Bible: The Story of God through Time & Eternity, 366.
In no way, shape or form does Sproul suggest here that homosexuality is whispered about in Scripture. With the abundance of clear teaching on the issue throughout, Sproul’s own concept of “shout” would refute, NOT SUPPORT, any claim that Scripture permits homosexuality. It is clear, though, that Scripture shouts about homosexuality and all forms of sexual deviance through thought or deed as SIN that can be repented of and forgiven. If Sproul was still alive today, it would be interesting how he would respond to such a blatant misrepresentation and faulty application of his words.
Greear then clarifies his use of Wilkin’s quote by claiming:
Throughout Jesus’ ministry and His life we see Him demonstrating great, just incredible sympathy for those caught in sexual sin and great animosity toward the religiously proud. In fact, Jesus one time, not one time, ever said that it was difficult for the same-sex attracted to go to heaven. He did say it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of the needle, eye of a needle, than it was for a religiously proud or materialistically successful person to enter into the kingdom of God. That is not to say that same-sex behavior, is not sinful, just to say that we often present it differently than the Bible does.”
“Messages,” 28:30.
Has Greear just blatantly ignored 1 Corinthians 6:9-20, where Paul includes the greedy in a list of sins ALONG WITH thieves, drunkards, slanderers, swindlers and (you guessed it…) the sexually immoral? Yes!
Then Greear correctly reminds: “The worst sin, the core sin, the sin behind all the other sins is one we are all alike guilty of, and that is, replacing God’s rule with our rule, replacing ourselves to the center where He belongs.” (“Messages,” 29:04) Yes! This true assertion is repeated later in this sermon after Greear aptly details and includes the sins of racism and abortion. He concludes this thought by urging that we will stop being judgmental towards others when we realize that Jesus died for all people and “we are the worst sinner that we know.” (“Messages,” 29:24) He then rightly reminds us that all people are created in the image of God and we are to treat others with compassion. But, in the midst of all this, he claims a specific action as demonstrating all of this compassion is to “Stand up and be among the fiercest advocates for the preservation of the dignity and the rights of LGBT people.” (“Messages,” 38:11) Seriously? There is no clarification, just a clear statement that parallels a common liberal talking point lauding the importance of unique “rights” for such persons. So, which is it? It cannot be both. Is homosexuality a sin as any other sin and we are all sinners OR are those who engage in the sin of homosexuality a recognizably distinct group deserving of special “dignity” and “rights”? Again, it cannot be both! Yet another example of sacrificing truth on the altar of tone.