A Radical Reversal of Fortune

In modern discourse, wealth is frequently conflated with virtue. The prevailing narrative suggests that financial success is the natural result of moral fortitude, while poverty implies a lack of character. This "Prosperity Gospel," whether explicit in theology or implicit in policy, stands in stark contradiction to the teachings of Jesus.

Jesus did not merely suggest charity; he repeatedly warned that wealth was a spiritual liability. In the story of the Rich Young Ruler, Jesus does not ask for a tithe; he asks for everything: "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven" (Matthew 19:21). This was not a call to tax cuts for the wealthy, but a call to radical redistribution.

Furthermore, Jesus's teaching on the "Eye of the Needle" (Matthew 19:24) challenges the very accumulation of capital. While modern politics often seeks to protect the assets of the wealthy, Jesus warns that those very assets are obstacles to entering the Kingdom. He centers the poor not as objects of pity, but as the primary heirs of God's Kingdom. The "Red Letter" stance is not one of trickle-down economics, but of bottom-up liberation, where the last shall be first and the first shall be last.

The Theology of the Stranger

The current political climate often frames the immigrant, the refugee, and the outsider as threats to national security or economic stability. Rhetoric centers on walls, deportation, and "America First." However, Jesus's teachings dismantle the concept of national exclusivity. In the parable of the Sheep and the Goats, the ultimate criteria for judgment is not doctrinal purity or nationalism, but how the nations treated the vulnerable.

Significantly, Jesus does not merely ask his followers to have pity on the stranger; he identifies as the stranger. The Greek word used is xenos, the root of "xenophobia" (fear of the stranger). Jesus calls for the opposite: philoxenia (love of the stranger). When a society rejects a refugee, Jesus says, "You did not do it for me" (Matthew 25:45).

Jesus himself was a child refugee, fleeing violence in Judea for safety in Egypt. His ministry consistently broke social barriers, engaging with Samaritans (historical enemies of the Jews) and praising their faith over the religious elite. A "Red Letter" view of immigration does not ask "is it legal?" but "is it loving?" It prioritizes the humanity of the person seeking safety over the arbitrary lines drawn on a map.

The Myth of Redemptive Violence

Political narratives often rely on the "myth of redemptive violence", the idea that violence can be used to quell violence and establish peace. This leads to the glorification of military might, the death penalty, and the proliferation of personal weaponry. Jesus, however, introduces a Kingdom established not by the sword, but by self-sacrifice.

When Jesus commands his followers to "turn the other cheek," he is not advocating for passive submission to abuse, but for a defiant refusal to escalate the cycle of violence. In the Garden of Gethsemane, when Peter drew a sword to defend Jesus, a seemingly "just" war scenario, Jesus rebuked him, saying, "Put your sword back in its place, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword" (Matthew 26:52). He then healed the man Peter had wounded.

The "Red Letter" path rejects the logic of "Stand Your Ground." It calls for active peacemaking (Matthew 5:9), which requires far more courage than pulling a trigger. It challenges the believer to love their enemy (Matthew 5:44), dismantling the "us vs. them" mentality that fuels all warfare and political polarization.

The Trap of Moral Superiority

Much of modern "culture war" Christianity is focused on policing the behavior of others, restricting rights, banning books, and condemning lifestyles that do not align with traditional norms. This approach mirrors the Pharisees, whom Jesus criticized most harshly. The Pharisees were obsessed with the external purity of the nation, believing that strict adherence to the law would hasten the Messiah's coming.

Jesus inverted this dynamic entirely. He spent his time dining with "tax collectors and sinners," the very people the religious right of his day despised. When a woman was caught in the act of adultery, a clear violation of the law, Jesus did not condemn her. Instead, he turned the judgment back on the accusers: "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her" (John 8:7).

The teachings of Jesus prioritize internal transformation over external legislation. He warned that one could clean the outside of the cup while the inside remained full of greed and self-indulgence (Matthew 23:25). A "Red Letter" society is not one that forces its morality on others through law, but one that demonstrates such radical grace and lack of judgment that it transforms the heart of the community from the inside out.

A Modern Concept in Ancient Text

Claims that the Bible offers a clear condemnation of homosexuality often rely on reading modern concepts into ancient texts. The modern understanding of "sexual orientation", an innate, romantic, and sexual attraction to the same gender, was virtually unknown until the 19th century. When modern readers look for "homosexuality" in the Bible, they are often searching for a concept that the authors, including the Gospel writers, did not possess.

The True Sin of Sodom

The story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19) is frequently weaponized against LGBTQ+ individuals. However, the scholarly consensus, and the internal biblical witness, points to a different sin entirely: inhospitality. In the ancient Near East, hospitality to the stranger was a sacred duty. The men of Sodom did not seek a loving relationship; they threatened sexual violence against visitors, representing the pinnacle of inhospitality and the violation of the sacred guest-host bond.

Domination vs. Love

While there are ancient prohibitions in Leviticus and Paul's letters, they must be understood in their historical context. These texts were written in cultures where sexuality was understood primarily through the lens of domination and submission, not mutual love. The prohibitions address specific acts involving hierarchy and exploitation (such as pederasty or master/slave relations), not the loving, monogamous, long-term relationships we see today. Paul, for instance, likely had no concept of a same-sex relationship based on mutuality and equality.

"If you are leveraging the Bible to condemn homosexuals or LGBTQ+ identities, you need to fix your hearts."

Leveraging scripture to minoritize and oppress vulnerable groups often serves the interests of identity politics rather than the consistent application of biblical principles. The silence of Jesus on this specific topic, combined with his overwhelming emphasis on love, mercy, and the protection of the marginalized, suggests a different path than condemnation.

1. The "Fruit" Test

Jesus gave his followers a specific methodology for judging whether something is from God or not: "By their fruit you will recognize them" (Matthew 7:16). He argues that a "bad tree" (sin) cannot produce "good fruit" (love, joy, peace, patience).

• The Fruit of Exclusion: Historical condemnation of LGBTQ+ individuals has produced "bad fruit": suicide, self-hatred, depression, homelessness among youth, and violence. Jesus says a tree producing such rot is not of God.
• The Fruit of Inclusion: Committed, monogamous same-sex relationships frequently exhibit the "good fruit" of the Spirit: sacrificial love, faithfulness, and joy. If the relationship produces the fruit of the Spirit, Jesus's own logic suggests the tree is good.

2. The Hierarchy of Law

When asked what matters most, Jesus did not quote sexual prohibitions. He established a hierarchy of law: "‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart...’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments." (Matthew 22:37-40).

Any interpretation of scripture that causes harm to a neighbor violates the Greatest Commandment. Jesus repeatedly broke the "letter" of the law (working on the Sabbath, touching lepers) to fulfill the "spirit" of the law (mercy and healing).

He explicitly told the religious leaders: "But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’" (Matthew 9:13). To sacrifice the mental health and spiritual well-being of LGBTQ+ people on the altar of ancient purity codes is exactly the kind of "sacrifice without mercy" Jesus condemned.