Chris Bolt did an excellent job of debunking JD Hall's inaccurate criticism of Karen Swallow Prior (link to Chris' post). I was disappointed to see that JD has not repented of his post, but instead has doubled down on it with a new post insinuating the same kinds of things as the original post.
I mentioned my concern about JD's hatchet job on facebook and tagged Karen. Her comments regarding her motivation were refreshing and provide a very different light on her actions:
Karen: "I was invited to the event specifically to represent the "non-affirming" view, which I did."
In response to the question: "Did you get a chance to use the divinely inspired biblical terminology and the hope of the gospel?"
Karen responded: "That's the goal I went with and I pray God used my witness. The event also included folks who have renounced their past homosexual behavior and it was a blessing to support and encourage them."
As I said in my facebook post, I may not agree with Karen Swallow Prior's choice to attend the event she attended. Based on Karen's further comments, I might actually agree with her choice, but that's a moot point.
Even assuming I disagree with her on that point, my disagreement with her on that point does not allow me to stand behind hatchet jobs accusing her of all sorts of worse things. We Christians need to hold ourselves and the "discernment bloggers" to a high standard of honesty, integrity, and accuracy. Thanks to Chris Bolt for demonstrating that. It's not about "choosing sides," or about necessarily agreeing with every last one of Karen's decisions, but it's about basic honesty and carefulness. It's a ninth commandment issue.
-TurretinFan
Thursday, July 16, 2015
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Thank you for this post. You will find that anyone who speaks logically about these issues is treated with contempt or demonized by people at Pulpit and Pen and argued with by their enablers, such as Fred Butler, but thank you for taking the risk and standing up for basic ethical standards regarding how we disagree with someone else's stance. "Hatchet job" is a good descriptor. For my disgust at the P&P post, which follows a long line of hatchet jobs and blatant bullying, a few of my tweets have been misrepresented and mocked in their private Facebook group, "Pulpit Bunker".
It seems that ethical standards for disagreement can be thrown out the window at P&P, and as I have personally experienced, anyone who call this behavior bullying and tries to meaningfully engage those who do it will get smeared as bullies themselves, often behind their back. I think Psalm 101 has some things to say about that. As Christians, twisting truth and misrepresentation can never be acceptable, however much we disagree with a person. This publicly shameful behavior must be exposed, and I'm glad for what you have said here. Thank you.
Melody Young
My last sentence might make more sense if it read:
"This public and shameful behavior must be exposed for what it is"...etc.
Chris Bolt: //And I am sitting on my hands.//
Well if he truly was then it has to be noted like when the Apostle Paul had the epistle of Romans written, [Rom 16:22 I Tertius, who wrote this letter, greet you in the Lord.] or when the Apostle Peter has his first epistle written, [ 1Pe 5:12 By Silvanus, a faithful brother as I regard him, I have written briefly to you, exhorting and declaring that this is the true grace of God. Stand firm in it.] he thinks and dictated his thoughts very well to whoever it was who did type out his rebuttal to JD's false narrative and brutish assault on this professor JD accuses of being for homosexual rights!
I think the author made some valid points, but in my opinion he seemed no more loving, and no less vituperative than the opponent(s) he is shadowboxing against.
Pot calling the kettle black and all that...
kul post
Post a Comment