Adopting the Left's Loaded Language is Surrendering the Gospel on the Altar of Lies

Adopting the language of the left is like fighting a war with the enemy’s weapons while wearing their uniform—you might think you’re being clever, but all you’re doing is surrendering before the first shot is fired. And when it comes to Christians, having the knowledge of Christ written on our hearts and a foundation of truth upon which to stand, ideological surrender is that much worse.

Whether it be David Platt, Matt Chandler, or JD Greear, casually dropping terms like "same-sex attraction," "gender justice," or "reproductive healthcare," they’re not engaging in dialogue with the left—they’re capitulating. They’re waving the white flag, conceding not just the battle, but the entire moral high ground. The problem isn’t just semantics—it’s surrendering the truth … treason against the gospel.

Words matter. They frame the debate. They define the battlefield. When you call killing a child “terminating a pregnancy,” you’re not softening the blow—you’re sanitizing the bloodshed. When you call mutilating a child’s body “gender-affirming care,” you’re not being compassionate—you’re participating in a lie.

This is why the left has weaponized language with surgical precision, knowing full well that whoever controls the terms controls the argument. And when Evangelical leaders, those who should be the standard-bearers of biblical truth, adopt this language, they’re not being winsome—they’re being complicit.

Let’s be clear, this is not about being kind or loving or “hospitable,” or "engaging the culture." This is about truth versus lies. The Bible tells us, “Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything more than this comes from evil” (Matthew 5:37). But when we kowtow to the linguistic demands of the left, your “yes” becomes a weak “well, maybe,” and your “no” becomes a mealy-mouthed “not exactly.” This isn’t biblical faithfulness—it’s spineless accommodation. It’s theological cowardice dressed up as cultural engagement.

One of the most overused phrases by Evangelicals is "same-sex attraction." It sounds clinical, harmless even, like describing a dietary preference. But what does it actually do? It divorces the sin from the sinner, reducing a moral rebellion against God’s design into something as benign as a preference for chocolate over vanilla.

When Christians use this term, they smuggle in the idea that sin is simply a condition to be managed, not an affront to the holiness of God to be repented of. It’s a Trojan horse, and too many of us have welcomed it right through the gates of the church.

And "gender-affirming care"? If ever there were a phrase that dripped with Orwellian doublespeak, this is it. There’s nothing affirming about pumping kids full of puberty blockers or slicing healthy body parts off of confused teenagers. It’s mutilation, pure and simple. But when we adopt this language, it lends legitimacy to the lie. It’s not engaging or building bridges—it’s enabling and burning the truth to the ground.

Then there’s the sanctified euphemism of "reproductive healthcare," as though slaughtering an unborn child is the moral equivalent of treating a sinus infection. Fortunately, most Christians don’t use this phrase … yet. But trust me, it’s coming, sooner or later. How can you proclaim the sanctity of life while parroting the language of those who advocate for its destruction? You can’t. You simply can’t.

But this one is highly used among the woke wing of Evangelical social justice warriors: “undocumented worker.” Russell Moore, David French—the late Tim Keller—they are champions of this doublespeak. It is used in place of “illegal alien” to obscure the criminal activity of entering the country illegally. And typically, they cloak it in the language of “loving your neighbor” or “made in the Image of God.”