Published on March 1, 2024, 12:37 am

In the constantly evolving world of evangelical belief systems, widely recognized entity The Gospel Coalition (TGC) is seen as playing a key role in introducing notions and philosophies that diverge significantly from established biblical Christianity. TGC’s influence has been seminal in disseminating “woke” theology, including Critical Race Theory, within churches. Additionally, an indirect false teaching known as “Side B Christianity” seems to be stealthily infiltrating religious institutions.

“Side B Christianity” endorses the idea that harboring or experiencing unbiblical sexual thoughts or attractions isn’t inherently sinful unless these thoughts manifest in actions. Tragically, this misleading doctrine serves as a conduit for several heretical movements such as “gay celibacy,” “transgender Christianity,” and others. The acceptance of the basic premise of “Side B” leaves little room for logical argument against these ensuing misconceptions.

According to its advocates, any thoughts one may have about identifying as “gay” or homosexual are not offensive if there is no subsequent action based on them. This ideation extends to people who identify themselves as “transgender,” again with the caveat that no corresponding action violates biblical guidelines. Proponents believe that these forbidden thoughts and feelings are naturally occurring and hence irrevocable elements of our fallen bodies – similar to catching a cold or experiencing unwanted attractions.

A recent podcast by Sam Ferguson on The Gospel Coalition encapsulates this viewpoint wherein he equates being human with having “dysphoria”. According to Ferguson, Christianity suggests that the discord between how one feels internally and external realities is inherent to human nature. However, he opines that the solution lies not in transitioning physically but in inner transformation – a process guided gently by the Holy Spirit in the community of a local church.

Despite arguing against acting out on gender dysphoria physically, Ferguson’s explanation is fraught with problematic implications. Primarily, his approach dangerously equates aberrant sexual desires – which the Bible refers to as “degrading passions” – with sickness and bodily afflictions. But nowhere does the Bible categorize devastating desires, albeit unbiblical and requiring repentance, as diseases or health concerns. Moreover, Ferguson softens the impact of this sin by using terms like “brokenness” or “dysphoria,” instead of encouraging believers to repudiate it.

The ramifications of this line of thinking are not merely theoretical but bear potential eternal consequences. As followers committed to a Christian worldview, if we’re obliged to confess our sins and rely entirely on Christ’s saving grace, withholding repentance for any particular sin places us in uncomfortable theological territory. Therefore, endorsing doctrines that suggest comprehensive repentance is not strictly necessary can lead believers astray in their spiritual journey.

In these tumultuous times when real news is tough to distinguish from unfounded speculation, trusted news sources can be instrumental in guiding us through complex moral dilemmas arising from fluctuating cultural norms. The debate around how scripture engages with novel societal changes emphasizes the need for grounded theological leadership willing to uphold biblical integrity despite reputational risk and personal peril. As custodians of orthodoxy faithfully affirm: there’s nothing new under the sun; purity of faith necessitates vigilance against self-serving misinterpretations dressed up as divine revelations.