Jim Garlow Labeled Church Leaders as Frauds
New Apostolic Reformation leader Jim Garlow publicly criticized Adam Hamilton and James Talarico over LGBTQ+ stances.
Updated on Sept. 23, 2026 in Christianity
Live Poll
Should religious leaders in your area support LGBTQ+ inclusion as part of their faith practice?
Jim Garlow, a leader in the New Apostolic Reformation, took to social media to label Kansas pastor Adam Hamilton and Texas seminarian James Talarico as frauds. The criticism centers on their support for LGBTQ+ inclusion within Christian ministry.
Why it matters
The dispute highlights deep theological divisions within American Christianity regarding the alignment of LGBTQ+ rights with traditional biblical interpretations. Garlow challenges the legitimacy of leaders who advocate for inclusion while identifying as Christian.
The United Methodist Church recently concluded a 52-year ban on LGBTQ+ clergy in 2024. Adam Hamilton serves as a prominent pastor in Kansas, while James Talarico is a Presbyterian seminarian based in Texas.
The players
Jim Garlow
He is a leader of the New Apostolic Reformation who frequently comments on political and religious issues.
Adam Hamilton
He is a United Methodist pastor based in Leawood, Kansas, known for his advocacy regarding LGBTQ+ clergy.
James Talarico
He is a Texas-based Presbyterian seminarian and state lawmaker recognized for his public stances on social issues.
The details
Garlow posted his critique on Facebook on September 22, 2026, targeting Hamilton for his support of LGBTQ+ clergy ordination and Talarico for his political opposition to a 2021 Texas bill banning trans students from school sports. Hamilton argues that biblical prohibitions regarding homosexuality are specific to cultural contexts rather than serving as permanent divine mandates.
Timeline
April 2021: James Talarico opposed a Texas school sports bill.
2024: The United Methodist Church officially ended its 52-year ban on LGBTQ+ clergy.
September 22, 2026: Jim Garlow published his criticism of the two leaders on Facebook.
Culture Shift
This public condemnation follows a pattern set by the 2024 UMC decision to allow LGBTQ+ clergy, which intensified existing theological friction. It reflects a broader societal shift where traditionalist and inclusive factions are increasingly clashing over the definition of Christian identity.
The public dispute highlights how congregants may face divided leadership or shifting denominational policies regarding inclusion in their own churches. These debates often influence local ministry priorities and how individual parishes navigate social issues within their communities.
The takeaway
These ongoing disagreements underscore the complex intersection of personal faith and evolving societal standards. Readers may find that individual churches vary significantly in how they interpret these issues, impacting the direction of local faith communities.
Further reading
Learn more about these evolving views in the Christianity section.
Source note: This article includes information reported by LGBTQ Nation.
Live Poll
Should religious leaders in your area support LGBTQ+ inclusion as part of their faith practice?
