Warren Throckmorton

This blog post articulates a view of research (and message to Evangelicals) from a theologian that is not far from my own. This is a significant statement from a very prominent Evangelical.

Dr. Mohler ends with this observation:

Christians must be very careful not to claim that science can never prove a biological basis for sexual orientation. We can and must insist that no scientific finding can change the basic sinfulness of all homosexual behavior. The general trend of the research points to at least some biological factors behind sexual attraction, gender identity, and sexual orientation. This does not alter God’s moral verdict on homosexual sin (or heterosexual sin, for that matter), but it does hold some promise that a deeper knowledge of homosexuality and its cause will allow for more effective ministries to those who struggle with this particular pattern of temptation. If such knowledge should ever be discovered, we should embrace it and use it for the greater good of humanity and for the greater glory of God.

I understand that some regular readers will take exception to his theological view of homoeroticism. My point here is to note that a major Evangelical leader has acknowledged the potential role of prenatal factors for some homosexuality which seems to be at odds with the prevailing view the U.S..

At least one influential Evangelical blogger has taken note as well. As has Andrew Sullivan.

Feedback from a Dutch writer, with permission. Do you think Wiskerke is correct?

Dear Warren Throckmorton,

I’ve read your article ‘Why Do I Have These Feelings’ on the internet. As an European Christian (Dutch), rather conservative, I can identify with your vision on the origins of homosexuality. I have written ‘as an European Christian’, because I’ve got the impression that American evangelicals in general emphasize over and over again that homosexuality is not a congenital orientation, as if they need that to defend that homosexual relations are wrong. In my observation (which is limited) American evangelicals are quite militant in this, with the Ted Haggard story as one of the results: he had (and has) to deny that he has an homosexual orientation, although that may be the case (but who am I to decide that), with the risk to create a virtual image of himself and the obligation to live by that image.

Am I right that your vision on the origins of homosexuality is rare amongst American evangelicals? In the Netherlands, even conservative Christians who don’t condone homosexual relationships are not afraid to see homosexuality as an orientation that has a complex origin, and probably has a congenital dimension. There are church members/elders/pastors who can say that they have a homosexual orientation, and that they expect to live with that their whole life, but they choose to abandon homosexual relationships. Is my conception right that this approach is not very known among American evangelicals?

With regards,

C. Wiskerke,

Writer

NPR was in Phoenix and reported on the Love Won Out conference there. Clicking the link will begin streaming the 5 minute segment.

Here is a story based on the broadcast.

Believe it or not, Donnie Davies is hanging on. Esquire magazine has a Q & A with “Rev. Davies.” He says the C.H.O.P.S. program is coming. We have an exclusive look here at what the CHOPS program may involve.

Tomorrow Alan Chambers joins a guest panel to discuss homosexuality on the The Montel Williams Show. The show will also feature Tom and Donna Cole, former homosexuals who have a ministry to Christians struggling with sexual and relational issues. I am pretty sure Richard Cohen may have some role on the program.

This comes from an Exodus News Release. Nothing is on the Montel Williams Show website about the segment as yet.

UPDATE: 2/28/07 – Unless Montel’s website is wrong, the appearance by Alan Chambers is most likely being taped today for later broadcast.