Thank You

Thank You July 20, 2012

The Gospel Coalition and Jared Wilson have done the right thing and have removed the offensive post. Let me say this again: the post was offensive to women and inappropriate language for the marriage bed. When I read the post the first time, what came to my mind was this observation: No way does this represent The Gospel Coalition. I’ve read Piper’s book and Kellers’ book and their views of marriage are honorable, theological, cruci-form and pastorally-sensitive. When I disagree, it’s over issues obvious to all of us. But the post on TGC’s blog did not represent what I know TGC stands for, and I want to express my gratitude for this decision. There are no winners or losers here folks; there is a step forward for truth and grace.

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Just saw the apology myself. Thanks for your voice in this, Scot!

  • Yes, thanks for your voice on this.

  • Thomas

    To bad we won’t get the same kind of apology or humility for those who chose to skewer Wilson. Many who assumed the worst, ignored his clarification, and made outlandish claims about his theological convictions.

  • Unncessary, Thomas. Unncessesary.

  • greg metzger

    And thanks to you as well. What you did reaches beyond this incident to your modeling of “charity and clarity” in discourse among Christians.

  • Dan

    Thomas, you are right but I don’t think it will happen. Blog responses are like conversations. When not controlled by a moderator it is too easy to call other names and one might not if in a face to face exchange. In this case the righteous indignatiin was so high that nothing Wilson said would satisfy. Some of the comments made were beyond the pale and not very Christlike.

    At this point both sides must live with what they’ve said. It’s in the blogosphere forever. The whole situation is sad and avoidable.

  • metanoia

    To Thomas and Dan: I agree with you both.
    To Scot: I would have preferred a call for a “counterpoint” blog entry. Perhaps even on this blog rather than at TGC. Truth can stand up to scrutiny. I have read theological dialog that was much more “offensive” while benefiting from the privilege of scholars and students who have engaged in spirited debate using strong rational, and theological discourse without resorting to questioning motives and even personal attacks.

    But alas, we still live in a broken world and even the best of us can still show an occasional edgy or dark side.

  • Indeed! A step forward on a long road to travel. I applaud TGC for this retraction.

  • MWK

    Kudos to Scot for his tepid response to the unfortunate blog by Wilson. Unfortunately, some of the comments on this blog and others failed to heed James 1:19-20, producing a sad and often ridiculous discourse. Jared Wilson isn’t the only one in need of repentance over this.

  • Burch

    Ditto to MWK’s comment.

  • Lisa

    The apology was not the issue for me. The apology was for posting the blog, but it was clear that Jared and many others agreed with ideas expressed in the blog.

    As a woman who left the church two decades ago in large part due to the overt misogynism I witnessed, I can only say that I am very happy my daughters and son weren’t exposed to such damaging ideas. I think to teach fathers and sons that women need to “be conquered and colonized” in the marriage bed in order to be “real men” is sick and abusive. And the fact that many people in the christian community support this thinking makes me sad and afraid for kids exposed if not brainwashed by such thinking.

    I don’t understand why so many men feel that to relate to women as equals is to emasculating to them. In fact my father, husband, son, and male friends and colleagues seem to handle it quite well. I just don’t get how these notions are even tolerated by most christians.

  • Albion

    Doug Wilson just makes me sad.

  • KEP

    After seeing Douglas Wilson’s response to this row, along with a couple of comments there, I think Jared Wilson’s distancing from him is rather warranted. I appreciate Jared Wilson’s apology, and sense genuine charitable warmth there. And much mud that was thrown at him was ill-advised. Scot, your words, along with Rachel’s, were measured and helpful for many of us readers. I fear Douglas Wilson remains a bit tone deaf to it all. Perhaps the best response to him in this case is simply to ignore.

  • Just hope the many hours spent debating & dissecting this issue on the blogosphere can now be spent focussed on the urgent task of spreading the Gospel of Jesus near, far & wide, with those who as yet do not know Jesus for themselves.

  • Thomas

    @ KEP
    Describing RHE words as “measured” is a massive distortion and really just white washing of sin and manipulation. To use her platform to insinuate Jared Wilson was supporting abuse or violence toward women, in spite of him explicitly saying otherwise is just wrong and something she should apologize for.

    I say all of this as someone who is not a fan of Jared Wilson and think his post showed poor emotional intelligence. But I am equally sad at the opportunistic nature of RHE and others to further a theological agenda through the fault of someone else. James 1:19-20 seems quite apt.

  • Michael

    Thomas, I’ve re-read Rachel’s posts multiple times and I can’t find any of these “insinuations” you accuse her of. Unless you can quote specific passages, I can’t take your complaint seriously. Perhaps you’re thinking of someone else?

  • @Thomas,

    RHE is “further[ing] a theological agenda”? If by that, you mean she is furthering the cause of female equality in the church, then yes. But that’s not some scary agenda; that’s just the gospel.

  • Thomas

    So egalitarianism is the Gospel? Talk about co-opting the message of King Jesus. I guess I must not be a Christian then…

    What I meant by that David is she took a post by Jared that was in poor taste, but about how our culture is revealing in sexual perversion, and turned it into an opportunity to stump for her theological cause. If this is how she does theology than I stand by saying it more clearly resembles the way we do politics in this country, rather than the Jesus Creed.

  • Albion

    Thomas: Jared did not apologize for poor taste. He apologized for quoting Doug Wilson who said that in sex, men conquer and colonize and women accept and receive. Sex as male conquest is flatly contradicted by 1 Cor 7 and that is what Rachel and her readers rightly objected to. Rachel was not pushing an agenda, and I appreciate Jarod’s apology. Doug Wilson, for his part, sees no problem with what he wrote; in fact, he remains defiant and unapologetic. He can’t imagine that abused women would have a problem with domination language. To his credit, Jared can.

  • DRT

    At the risk of extending this debate, I add the following.

    I have quite an emotional reaction to the wording used, but lack the skill to say why the language effects me the way it does. Here is a good article that analyzes the phrasiology (I don’t no good english), and says why it offends. I certainly learned a lot.

  • donsands
  • Glenn J

    I am a huge fan of Jared Wilson, having read his book, Gospel Wakefulness, which woke me up to the the Gospel. So to see him take down the post and apologize – kudos. And thank you Scot!

  • scotmcknight

    metanoia, though it was not extensive, I did offer a counterpoint: I said it was indefensible because the connection of authority to that language was contrary to 1 Cor 7; my focus was on its incommensurability with TGC, which both TGC leaders and Jared agreed with; he pulled the post down, apologizing … not sure anything further needs to be said. The best way to respond to this sort of thing is not by way of counterpoint but by offering a better way. May I suggest you take a look at my Sex.Life chp in One.Life? I’m planning a better way, but for now just read Tim and Kathy Keller’s excellent book.

    I’ll say this again: I have loads of respect for TGC, even if theologically we are on different pages, and, as a new movement and experiment, I’m glad to see its response to some of the more extreme expressions among its people — like Macdonald, Driscoll and now this singular post by Jared. It appears to me TGC is gravitating slowly toward Tim Keller, and if it does it will have my support (except for the tenets of Calvinism). [Metanoia, you can tweet that!]

  • Thomas

    Scot for you to categorize Driscoll and MacDonald separating from TGC as them doing away with the more “extreme” expressions is inaccurate….

    In what way are they more extreme? What does that word even mean in the context in which you used it? Often the word “extreme” is used to marginalize someone you disagree with.

    And the irony of it all is the truth. The fact that Macdonald and Driscoll actually distanced from TGC because they were wanting to be more ecumenical across the scope of evangelicalism. In many ways they were refusing to be “Reformed enough” for some in the TGC crowd. Go ahead and look at Driscoll’s conference in October and the lineup of speakers and tell me how it is “extreme.” It is loaded with pastors who differ with him on major doctrines.

  • metanoia

    Scot: How about, “McKnight @ Jesus Creed endorses Tim Keller, except for the tenets of Calvinism!” I’m sure my 37 followers on Twitter will create quite the stir. 😉

    Much appreciation for you, my brother. Thankfully we agree on way more than we disagree.

  • scotmcknight

    Thomas, I guess we see the same things differently.

  • scotmcknight

    Thomas, I’m trying to write to you but you have given a bogus e-mail address.

  • scotmcknight

    Not sure why, but I found a bundle of comments in the spam filter … and I can’t figure out why they were blocked. Anyway, time to wrap this conversation up…