Theologically Sound. Culturally Relevant.


Rachel Denhollender blames biblical sexuality for Georgia gunman

In the wake of the massacre in Atlanta, Georgia that left 8 people dead, the media rushed to speculate on the causes and motivations. Big Eva perhaps carried the torch further by legitimizing attacks against the church that the media lauched following this shooting. According to reports, the alleged shooter, Robert Aaron Long, was motivated by “sexual addiction” and not race as widely speculated on social media. It was later uncovered that he may go to a Southern Baptist church, one that is affiliated with Founders Ministry. Rachel Denhollander came over the top rope to tweet this:


This is a long thread in which Rachel Denhollander blames initiatives like the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood and sound teaching on biblical sexuality for radicalizing murderers. Of course, it’s worth mentioning that Denhollander is using an irresponsible straw man fallacy here.

There are several things wrong with Rachel Denhollander’s words. Let’s exegete them:

First she legitimizes his “sex addiction.” Sex addiction is not a real thing. It’s a lie. It’s not the real motivation for murder. This is a lack of personal responsibility.

Secondly, being baptized by a Southern Baptist church is not a high standard of involvement in said church. He could have merely prayed the Sinner’s Prayer one service, and was subsequentially baptized.

Then she blames the church. She levies a major accusation against the church because of this church’s commitment to biblical sexuality. What is deliberately ignored here is that this church more than likely teaches on more than just sexuality. Does Rachel Denhollander honestly think that this church does not teach the Ten Commandments? Exodus 20:13 is taught in most churches in the United States.

Rachel Denhollander’s criticism is ultimately a self-serving. She’s trying to increase her own standing at the expense of a church. In doing so she is slandering the brethren. This is wicked. It’s is an irresponsible witness.

Going back to the murders, alleged murderer, Robert Aaron Long is an incel. If you recall the moves Taxi Driver or the more recent, Joker. Both films address the concept of an incel. An incel is a adult male who is isolated, often views pornography and harbors a resentment towards women, and rejects person responsibility and masculinity. Whereas the main character in Taxi Driver, ultimately overcomes being an incel, the Joker descends into madness. This event in Georgia appears as though the latter has taken place.

Millennials are the loneliest generation and perhaps Gen Z is even lonelier. If the church should take any lesson from this it should not be a softening of biblical sexuality. Instead it should be outreach efforts to ensure that young males don’t turn into incels. Ultimately, it is the grace of God that prevents us from succumbing to the worst sins of humanity. Therefore, we should not be quick to insult Christ’s Bride because of the sins of people who were ultimately not Christian.


3 Responses

  1. If someone murders the preachers and/or authors of the books she mentions is that then her fault? She may suffer from the abandonment of classical education where students were taught logic and reason. Oh but I forget, logic and reason are part of the white male patriarchy…

    1. It’s like blaming Catcher and the Rye for John Lennon’s death. A complete logical disconnect to favor a narrative.

  2. This article’s summary of Denhollander’s view is inaccurate on its face: She does not criticize “sound teaching on Biblical sexuality” in any way, and she does not blame the church for the murder Long committed. She gives more detail than is possible in tweets in a Washington Post article, which I strongly encourage everyone to read before reaching a conclusion about her argument:

    There she explicitly acknowledges that “[l]eaders in both Long’s own church and broader SBC ministry have repudiated the killing of these women, and of course none of them have taught that murder is an acceptable solution to sexual addiction.” She does not blame the church for the murder, or suggest in any way that its leaders would approve.

    And she does not criticize sound teaching on Biblical sexuality. Here’s what she does criticize: “Teachings that place the burden and blame for men’s sexual addictions on women are rampant in conservative theological circles. Assertions that women are both the cause of men’s sexual addictions and the solutions to their sexual needs fill the pages of popular sex and marriage books in evangelical circles, and infiltrate counseling sessions for followers in crisis. Porn addictions are taught as arising when a man’s “need [for sex] is not being met,” while popular teen magazine Brio warned adolescent girls that “If a guy sees a girl walking around in tight clothes, a miniskirt or short shorts, you might as well hang a noose around the neck of his spiritual life.” In conversations about marriage, sexuality and masculinity, women are viewed as both the cause of, and the cure for, men’s sexual aggression.”

    Somewhat separately, the following claim from this article is an extremely serious accusation about Denhollander’s motives: “Rachel Denhollander’s criticism is ultimately a self-serving. She’s trying to increase her own standing at the expense of a church.” I submit that extremely serious accusations should not be made without a significant degree of evidence, and I submit that–even if everything Denhollander said were false–the writer of this article cannot have enough evidence about her motives for saying it to justify the accusation.

Leave a Reply

Get Evangelical Dark Web Newsletter

Bypass Big Tech censorship, and get Christian news in your inbox directly.

Join 5,117 other subscribers

Trending Posts