Posted on 10/01/2024 8:59:49 PM PDT by Morgana
The Lausanne Movement, founded in 1974, presents itself as a global evangelical network aimed at fulfilling the Great Commission. However, it has since evolved into a platform for globalist ideologies, aligning closely with organizations like the World Economic Forum.
Prominent evangelical leaders within Lausanne, including false teachers such as Tim Keller, David Platt, and Rick Warren, push for social justice, wealth redistribution, and environmental activism. This movement subtly repackages Christianity to support a socialist agenda, undermining the true gospel in favor of worldly philosophies and a distorted social mission.
The Lausanne Movement not only aligns with these globalist ideologies but has also embraced the promotion of homosexuality within its agenda. While it claims to uphold traditional biblical teaching on sexual ethics, it simultaneously advances the normalization of “same-sex-attracted Christianity.”
The movement collaborates with sexuality ideologues like Mark Yarhouse and LGBTQ ally, Preston Sprinkle, who advocate for LGBTQ acceptance under the guise of “celibacy” and “faithful presence.” This push softens biblical teachings on sin, creating a foothold for LGBTQ activism within the church and further diverting the gospel’s true message.
In its 2024 Seoul Statement, which is being actively promoted by The Gospel Coalition and its contributors, Lausanne promotes the Revoice ideologies that are increasingly prominent within Evangelical circles, namely that homosexual desires are not sinful, therefore, churches are being “unloving” by not affirming them.
We recognise that a number of people, both within and outside the church, experience same-sex attraction, and that for some, this is the only or dominant attraction. The biblical insistence that Christians must resist temptation and so maintain sexual holiness, in both desire and behaviour, applies equally to heterosexually attracted individuals as it does to same-sex attracted persons. We acknowledge, however, that Christians who are same-sex attracted face challenges even in Christian communities. We repent of our lack of love towards our brothers and sisters in the body of Christ.
We urge Christian leaders and local churches to recognise within our communities the presence of believers who experience same-sex attraction, and to support them in their discipleship by pastoral care and by developing healthy communities of love and friendship.
Lausanne’s statement certainly appears to be a deliberate attempt to undermine the biblical view of sexuality. When did we start confusing love with the affirmation of sin? The Bible isn’t ambiguous here and it requires serious mental gymnastics to walk away after reading it with the conclusion that the desires that lead to same-sex acts are somehow not described as dishonorable. Yet, Lausanne glosses over this, urging churches to support these desires under the guise of “discipleship.” Discipleship without repentance? That’s not discipleship—it’s a road to Hell.
The notion that same-sex-attracted Christians face a “unique challenge” is basically just an attempt to gaslight Christians into believing they are at fault for the problems that plague homosexuals. It’s distraction. Is their struggle any different from anyone else’s battle against sin? No. The gospel demands every believer—without exception—to forsake not just sinful actions but also the sinful passions that fuel them.
Yet Lausanne paints a picture of a special category of struggle, framing biblical conviction as a supposed “lack of love.” It’s a bait-and-switch, offering emotional affirmation where spiritual discipline is called for.
And here’s where they really lose the plot. Lausanne equates compassion with affirmation. The church’s role is not to coddle sin but to confront it—to call for repentance, not to hand out participation trophies for “noble” struggles.
True Christian love involves pointing sinners toward repentance and faith in Christ, not building a cozy retreat on the broad road. Lausanne’s refusal to draw a line between the sinner and the sin creates a breeding ground for dangerous, unchecked desires. How is that loving?
This is no mere misunderstanding here, Lausanne and its promoters have an agenda. By prioritizing emotional comfort over the gospel, Lausanne promotes a false gospel stripped of its power to save. In its wake, we’re left with a counterfeit Christianity that seeks to accommodate rather than convict.
Unfortunately, this movement is the driving force behind the vast majority of Evangelical churches today.
Any church that ignores the bible in this regard is not a Christian church and any followers will pay the price for their lack of discernment.
“The gospel demands every believer—without exception—to forsake not just sinful actions but also the sinful passions that fuel them.”
False. We can control actions but not urges. If I lust after a married woman, I need to try to stop lusting after her, and I certainly need to NOT ACT ON IT. As the saying goes, you cannot stop a bird from landing on your head, but you can stop it from building a nest there!
ALL CHRISTIANS still struggle with sins. Which sins cause us the most problem varies. Pride and anger are mine. We have no right to justify those impulses and we need to confess and repent when we give in to them - which we all do, sometimes. Justification comes the moment you believe, but sanctification - becoming good - is a life-long process and no one has finished prior to dying.
The biblical insistence that Christians must resist temptation and so maintain sexual holiness, in both desire and behavio[u]r is very real.
The tenth commandment is Thou Shalt Not Covet. This means we should not so much as desire to sin. Nor desire good things overmuch. Purely a thought and heart issue. So yes desiring to sin sexually is indeed a sin. See Jesus telling us we can not look at another (presumably non spouse or intended) with lust without committing adultery in our hearts.
There are degrees of sin. Contemplating a homo act is not as wicked as doing it.
But it’s still a sin.
Thanks for the post.
Keller and Warren wandered off the reservation bigly during Biden, inflamed by the “insurrection” and some TDS. It was surprising to me, and a huge diaspointment.
“So yes desiring to sin sexually is indeed a sin. See Jesus telling us we can not look at another (presumably non spouse or intended) with lust without committing adultery in our hearts.”
First, NO ONE - including you - can prevent temptation. Nor does scripture say being TEMPTED is sin! EVER. To feel an urge to do a sin is 100% normal for humans and will be as long as we live.
Jesus was addressing two points you are missing. First, there is a fleeting temptation than no one can avoid (seeing a beautiful woman and thinking WOW) and there are temptations we INDULGE. Looking at a woman with lust doesn’t mean just a momentary desire, but looking at her, wanting her, dwelling on it, enjoying wanting her, imagining sex with her.
So if one sees a beautiful teen girl, for example, and thinks WOW, then accepts it would be wrong and goes on with life...that is temptation, which God allows to come to all of us in some form.
DWELLING on it is sin, even if no physical action takes place. And of course, following up the temptation with physical action is also sin.
But remember: Jesus was tempted. Without sin.
SECOND, the point of the Sermon on the Mount is what separates us from God. The fact that we DO feel a desire to sin, that all of us are SINNERS and not “good people who sometimes mess up”, is the point of the Sermon. We are SINNERS. All of us. And the LAW cannot save us because the LAW didn’t even apply to desires. But our sin nature is revealed in our having desires, and proven by how often we dwell on those desires and then act on them.
“And Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the wilderness for forty days, being tempted by the devil.”
Being tempted is not sin. Enjoying the temptation is, as is acting on it.
Being tempted is not a sin. I know.
Sinful desire is a sin.
There is a difference: that’s coveting. Those defending same sex attraction in the deteriorating evangelical community are not talking about temptation. They are talking about “side b.” Identity. They are a “same sex attracted person.” Just as legit as an opposite sex attracted person — that’s fine!, as long as they don’t have physical sex with a same sex person, in their view. They are horribly wrong and the church must stand against this.
If we desire to have homosexual sex, or sex with an animal, or we desire to be a drunkard, or a glutton, or steal something, or even hate someone — we are sinning. Not as badly as if we actually do it. But it is still sin and must be mortified. Not glorified or ok’d.
My understanding is they are talking about people tempted by homosexual desires but who recognize those desires are evil and must be resisted - just as a drunk needs to resist the desire to drink.
Same Sex Attraction Disorder was the APA’s designation for homosexuals’ illness. Then the queers prevailed in having it removed from the schedule of mental disease.
What your post illustrates is the simple impossibility of anyone to ever be sin free.....other than Christ.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.