Peter: How do @KSPrior, @edstetzer, and @JonathanMerritt view John Piper on spousal abuse?Karen Swallow Prior (KSP): Obviously I approve of every single thing and every single action of every single person in every single world and all parallel universes.Peter: Oops. My bad. I wasn't inquiring for a comment on the theory of everything. Just a response to @JohnPiper on spousal abuse to women in troubled marriages.KSP: Why of all the things in the universe are you asking me about this? Of course smacking a woman is abuse. Why would anyone think I'd think otherwise? These Childish trolling games are unbecoming of Christians.Peter: Childish trolling games? Are you kidding me? All I asked was a question on how you viewed Piper's advice to women in troubled marriages, a cause you're obviously concerned about. And that's childish trolling games?Peter: So what do we do with Piper? Do we condemn him? Call for his resignation? Ban him from SBC circles? What?KSP: The SBC is my denomination. I have a stake in its leadership. Whatever denomination Piper is it's not mine.Peter: Excuse me, but Piper is one of the most influential leaders in the SBC. His friendship runs deep with Al Mohler, Mark Dever, et al. And therefore Piper's view on spousal abuse doesn't alarm you?KSP: Such bullying is unbecoming of a man let alone a Christian. Be well.Peter: So I'm a bully because I asked an honest question of a seminary professor who assisted in writing and promoting a letter to the trustees of another seminary calling on them to fire the president? Mercy me.
- Is this the level of engagement we're to accept from social-media critics when we ask them honest questions about the moral charges they publicly launch against Southern Baptist leaders?
- Is it now "bullying" if we question a scholar who happens to be a woman about her position on a particular issue?
- Are Southern Baptist trustees really going to seriously entertain the emboldened moral charges against Paige Patterson while the very same critics either dodge the question or turn their morally condemnatory head while John Piper is completely ignored for offering arguably worse counsel than critics complain about Patterson?
The outrage expressed concerning the president of Southwestern seminary seems to be not so much about moral principle as it is about the man Patterson.