Praise God for Jared Wilson’s Humility

If you haven’t taken time to read Jared Wilson’s latest blog post, go read it now. He has removed his “50 Shades of Gray” commentary that caused such a stink this week. He also explains why and offers an apology. There is much wisdom and humility in what he has written, and we all have something to learn from it. I know I do, at least.

Jared stood accused of some pretty horrendous things these last few days (as did Doug Wilson)—things that were demonstrably false. I can only imagine how difficult it must have been to watch the false accusations accumulate across the internet. How much more difficult finally to let it all go and to let the Lord sort it all out. This is a great lesson for all of us, one we see modeled in the Lord himself: “While being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously” (1 Pet. 2:23).

I think Jared has acquitted himself honorably through all of this, and yet I agree with his reasons for taking the post down. The apostle Paul says, “So far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men” (Rom. 12:18). I’m thanking God for Jared and for giving us an example of how to do just that. I pray for the grace to do the same when my time comes.

28 Responses to Praise God for Jared Wilson’s Humility

  1. Don Johnson July 21, 2012 at 12:26 pm #

    I would like Jared to take off his blue lenses and become egal, but I agree that this is a lot to ask for. God is a God that honors a small step of faith. I hope Jared continues.

    I would hope that Jared and any group that claims Christ reconsider the use of quotes of Doug Wilson, at least until he repents.

  2. Derek Taylor July 21, 2012 at 3:51 pm #

    I agree that Jared has done the right thing. That said, it is very difficult to have honest and helpful dialogue when things go ad hominem. As such, I would tend to recommend not dialoguing with RHE until her arguments/accusations become more respectful and helpful.

  3. Don Johnson July 21, 2012 at 4:21 pm #

    http://randomcolin.wordpress.com/2012/07/19/language-sex-and-submission/#comment-375 is a linguistic analysis of what Doug wrote.

  4. Henry Bish July 21, 2012 at 5:32 pm #

    Whilst it is evident and commendable that Jared Wilson has a very tender heart, I’m uncomfortable with this course of action.

    I wonder whether we are not guilty of being manipulated by RHE and her followers. It seems evident to me that the bulk of the outrage (there may be some exceptions) proceeds not from genuine concern at all but from an egalitarian ideology whose nerve has been touched. And that is not a good thing to apologise to.

    The worrying thing is that even quoting certain verses in the bible could equally be deemed hurtful/oppressive/insensitive by this crowd.

    We frequently see Jesus and Paul evoking such foaming hatred amongst the enemies of the truth. Does that not give us pause for thought in this context?

    Additionally, “wisdom is proved right by her children”, and Doug Wilson’s incredible daughters (and wife!) are a better testimony than anything of his exemplary fatherhood.

    • Don Johnson July 21, 2012 at 5:45 pm #

      I think you are dead wrong in your analysis. There are huge genuine concerns.

      • Henry Bish July 21, 2012 at 6:20 pm #

        Yes Don, but you say that about complementarianism full stop, which kind of weakens your protest.

        • Darius T July 23, 2012 at 10:15 am #

          Exactly Henry. Doug Wilson was tarred and feathered because he dared stand on what the Bible clearly states. I think both Jared and Doug played it right… Jared apologized to the intolerant thought police, and Doug made them look like fools and called them names like a good Old Testament prophet. RHE and her minions look silly now that it’s all said and done.

          • Kamilla July 23, 2012 at 12:59 pm #

            Darius and Henry,

            Sadly, most people won’t see the proof that RHE is the most intolerant and hypocritical of all.

            Not only has she closed comments on her “Thank you” post, but she has also banned yet another commenter from maker future comments on her blog. His crime? Politely, reasonably and calmly -but persistently – asking her to apologize as well.

    • Jim July 21, 2012 at 6:12 pm #

      Amen Henry.

      Doug Wilson breaks down what is going here at:

      http://www.dougwils.com/Sex-and-Culture/the-politics-of-outrage.html#JOSC_TOP

      Two points:

      1) Let’s measure each movement or worldview by their fruits. Give it 5 or 10 years. Will each of us be marked with a greater love for Christ, His Church, and it’s people?

      2) We will all give account for every word we write. This should sober all of us – firstly me. The greater the pen we wield the greater the responsibility, temptation, and impact – for good and for ill.

      Of whom much is given much is required.

      Blessings!

  5. Henry Bish July 21, 2012 at 6:04 pm #

    Here are some interesting quotes from Steven Clark in his book ‘Man and Woman in Christ’ that relate to the larger issues of ideology (the ideology in this case being egalitarianism disguised as the whole ‘hurtful/insensitive’ charge):

    Modern ideologies appeal to people’s consciences, and those who reject an ideology must rely upon the force of an alternate ideological or moral position or contend with the guilt which results from rejecting the ideological appeal. This is why it is so important for Christians to be able to recognize non-Christian ideologies. If they cannot, they are defenseless against their moral appeal. Christians are among those most susceptible to ideological influence, precisely because of their high level of moral sensitivity. (p381, Man and Woman in Christ, 2006 Tabor House edition)

    It is a mistake to think the dominion of darkness is entirely devoid of ethics. Not only can Satan quote scripture, he can quote ethical principles. But even more, he teaches his own ethics, so that people can actually feel that it is wrong not to obey him…. (Ibid, p392)

    • Kamilla Ludwig July 22, 2012 at 4:45 pm #

      Henry,

      Thank you for the Clark quote.

      Does it surprise you that the feminists have never one engaged Clark’s work? No reviews, no criticism – nothing. In fact, the last time I checked, I found fewer than a half dozen mentions, but no substantial interaction.

      • Henry Bish July 22, 2012 at 6:22 pm #

        I’m not clued up enough on feminist literature to know, but I find it quite easy to believe. Minds that are closed to the truth will wilfully ignore the light and pay little attention to significant weaknesses in their arguments, as we have seen RHE do over and over again. Best to stay away from such people when this becomes clear, as the Apostle warns.

        It may also in part be due to the book’s size (768 pages in the old edition, 584 pages in the newer larger size edition) and also because complementarians themselves do not seem to tout his book very much (perhaps due to his position on headcoverings?). The only reason I heard about it is because of a recommendation by Tim Bayly over at BaylyBlog.

        I’ve not quite finished it yet, another 75 pages to go, but it is out-of-this-world good. It’s been a brilliant investment of time. If one reads only 10 pages a day of the 584 page edition you can get through it in 7 weeks. It contains some of the most helpful insights I have ever read. RBMW is like chicken feed compared to Clark’s magisterial work (I realise it’s ‘Stephen’ not ‘Steven’ like I last spelled).

        It makes me want to hunt out some other of this man’s books, although I understand he is a Catholic, although from what he is written he views the authority of the Pope/councils as subordinate to scripture and does not believe they have always been free from error, which is good.

        But yes, it is indeed a very good book. How long ago did you read it and do you find that you ever still refer to it?

        • Kamilla Ludwig July 22, 2012 at 6:28 pm #

          Big surprise, it was Tim Bayly who generously sent me one of his extra copies.

          I would guess it’s been about 5 years since I read it – and I do need to read it again, I keep telling myself.

          • Henry Bish July 22, 2012 at 6:58 pm #

            That’s pretty cool. I really like Tim Bayly, he has a pastors heart and the boldness of a lion. Tragic that most evangelical leaders are ashamed to even mention his name. He will get his reward from the King one day though.

  6. Joseph Bayly July 21, 2012 at 6:24 pm #

    This is utter nonsense, not humility. If he was right to do this, it would also be right of him to apologize for his previous apology for almost all the same reasons. And then he could apologize again for the previous apology. Rinse and repeat ad nauseam until everybody forgets what this was all about in the first place: daring to speak God’s truth about sexuality into a culture of sexual perversity.

    Jared realized too late that he had stepped into a gap in the wall that was under intense attack. Soon the bullets were flying around him, and he decided he must have done something wrong, because nobody at seminary ever taught him that men of God are attacked when they proclaim the truth. He’s learned his lesson now, though. He’ll let other people defend that gap in the wall–men like Doug Wilson, who don’t mind being shouted at and having people call for their heads on a pike.

    In fact, you can see Doug doing that here: http://baylyblog.com/blog/2012/07/sexual-design-series-lectures-doug-wilson

    • Kamilla Ludwig July 22, 2012 at 4:42 pm #

      Denny.

      I have to tell you that I agree with Joseph here.

      If is was good and humble for Jared to issue the apology – I want an apology too, for his apology.

      What his action in taking down the post and issuing his mea culpa does is tell women like me, those of us who had repented of our feminism, that we can”t trust our leaders to actually lead. That they will cave when the pressure gets too much. It tells us that we will have to stand alone. Its a win for the heretics ad their rhetorical terrorism tactics.

      Frankly, it makes me wonder why I gave up dozens of friendships to suffer the slings and arrows of those former friends.

      Except that I don’t really wonder that at all. I don’t because I’d serve my Lord even if he had take away all my friends and influence.

      Kamilla

  7. Shaun DuFault July 21, 2012 at 11:12 pm #

    Just reposting….

    I understand the apology. I do think though that the original post should remain for the purpose of context. It is as one person on Jared’s article noted that most of the negative responses were from an emotional reaction, which the reader is totally responsible for, instead of interacting with what was actually written. Jared cannot be held responsible for this, especially after spending time to clarify his original post.

    The negative to this is that authorial intent took a big step backwards as it would seem that the Scot Mcknight’s and the RHE’s seem to care more for what they wanted to see than what was explained.

    With authorial intent taking a step backwards, so does Biblical authority which McKnight likes to redefine and attack (Gen. 1-11). If a group of people can make someone step back away from the discussion by attacking authorial intent, one does wonder what will be next.

  8. Ryan Szrama July 22, 2012 at 12:25 am #

    The whole debacle was disappointing, to say the least, but Jared’s closing post is helpful. Here’s hoping he can tackle the 50 Shades topic from another angle so the collective fury is redirected to entertainment centered around tales of sexual violence against women. I’m not sure I ever saw a post from “the other side” engaging on the intention behind Jared’s original Wilson quote. They seem to have left the whole aberrant sexual fantasy novel thing alone. :-/

    • Pastor Joseph Bayly July 22, 2012 at 1:06 am #

      Ryan, if Jared isn’t allowed to tackle it by pointing out its root cause, which he already tried, why on earth would he bother talking about it at all? He knows it’s a bees’ nest now, so I’m guessing he’ll stay away.

      If all we are allowed to say to women engaging in “aberrant sexual fantasies” is what heretics who call God “she” (Rachel Held Evans) agree with, then to what degree do you think we will actually be able to address the sin they are trapped in?

      Well, as you’ve pointed out, the heretics don’t seem to be willing to say anything much about aberrant sexual fantasies, so apparently we won’t be able to say much either. In other words, you can’t redirect the collective fury of sexual anarchists against the sexual anarchy of 50 Shades. They are ultimately in agreement.

      According to Jared, the most important part of his closing post was the following: “For those offended or shamed, or otherwise and in any way burdened by my blog posts and my comments, your pain in this matter is totally my fault. Please forgive me.”

      Is he really serious? Nobody who was offended was offended by the truth of what God’s word teaches about sexuality? Nobody who was burdened was burdened by the recognition of their own sin? He claims the work of the Holy Spirit for himself, and then apologizes for it. That is not humility, but the pinnacle of pride.

      I found Doug Wilson’s closing post *much* more helpful than Jared’s. I would encourage you to read it here: http://www.dougwils.com/Sex-and-Culture/the-politics-of-outrage.html

      I put my own thoughts into a post and a few comments here: http://baylyblog.com/blog/2012/07/humble-stupid-does (Drupal site I built with 2 of my brothers-in-law, by the way. Thanks for your work in the community.)

      In Christ,
      -Joseph

  9. Ryan Szrama July 22, 2012 at 1:34 am #

    Hah, I love it when my Drupal world overlaps with my Christian life. It’s almost always unexpected and equally encouraging. : )

    And yeah, my comment was more a matter of wishful thinking pointing out how the egalitarian roster completely evaded the point of the original post. I’m a regular reader at Blog and Mablog, so I’m up on Doug’s take as well. (Not so much a regular of Femina, but I appreciated the post there about calls for tone setting in light of RHE’s encouragement to her readers to get angry as step one.)

    I think the first paragraph of Jared’s “What I First Did Wrong” was helpful, but in the end I agree that even had he couched the snippet in oodles of context (as he did in his follow-up), it still would have been an unforgivable citation to many.

    • Pastor Joseph Bayly July 22, 2012 at 1:49 am #

      By the way, Ryan, you’ve been an encouragement to me for quite a while in that you use your real name both in your “professional” and “personal” life online. Anybody who tries to find out more about you (when they see your work on D.O for example) will find out right away that you are a Christian and are not ashamed.

      Thank you for not being ashamed of the name of Christ, and if you’re ever in Indianapolis for any reason, please drop me a line, as I’d love to grab coffee with you.

  10. Henry Bish July 22, 2012 at 9:31 am #

    This comment from Doug Wilson in the comment section of his latest piece is very worthy of consideration:

    I am a pastor of a church with hundreds of people in it, which means hundreds of “pasts.” This is not a matter of statistical likelihood — I know their names. I can’t preach on abortion without knowing some of the people who have had them. I can’t preach on divorce without thinking of the people who have been divorced. I can’t preach on child abuse without thinking of the people who have been abused. In short, I can’t think of any point of application that might not be a devastating “trigger” for somebody. But that doesn’t just go for my preaching — it also goes for the Scripture reading.

    Where does it stop?

  11. Jim Talbot July 22, 2012 at 6:49 pm #

    And in the mean time….Doug Wilson manfully soldiers on….

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pastor-douglas-wilson/fifty-shades-women_b_1693138.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000008

  12. Darius T July 23, 2012 at 10:19 am #

    Doug Wilson has come out looking the best in all of this… he has called out the loony prophets of Baal and hasn’t compromised on the truth. RHE became irrelevant to the conversation, just another nut to ignore on the “Christian” Left.

    • Jim Talbot July 24, 2012 at 10:08 am #

      I agree with you, except I would position it as being found faithful. He has been a model of substantive grace under fire. He and his family are a real gift to the Church at this point in time. I pray that they would stay close to God as time marches on. They are at great risk.

      I think David Bayly sums it up well at: http://baylyblog.com/blog/2012/07/alone-again#comments

      “We need more men who understand that the prize of Evangelical legitimacy and authority so many are fighting for isn’t worth winning. That all that counts is to hear, “Well done, my good and faithful servant,” when the lonely course is run.”

  13. Darius T Eichrod July 24, 2012 at 2:51 pm #

    Denny, not sure if you’ve had a chance to read Wilson’s post today, but it is one of the best pieces I’ve ever read about how to handle it when people revile you for Jesus’ sake.

  14. Jack Riley July 25, 2012 at 8:30 pm #

    I’m glad the mutual admiration society is having fun here backslapping it up.
    However, I’m very sad that the faux complementarians are blind to their injurious and erroneous use of language when discussing such things as manhood and womanhood. Unless we recover true biblical manhood and womanhood (see Ligon Duncan/Susan Hunt’s work in the PCA), this movement is doomed and will become extinct by the YRR guys. It’s just so disappointing that so many people are being led astray into a false complimentarian view.
    That said, hats off to Jared for being man enough to own his part in the whole controversy, regardless of what other shenanigans were happening across the web. Thank you Jared!

  15. Kamilla Ludwig July 25, 2012 at 9:14 pm #

    Mr. Riley,

    No offense to my back slapping brethren, but I am not a Complementarian. Never have been and I hope I never will be. I prefer the more clearly biblical label – patriarchy.

    Kamilla

    P.S. If anyone STILL believes Mrs. Evans and her hordes of indignati were genuinely offended by Doug Wilson’s language, they should take a peek at the photo accompanying her recent “teammates” post.

Comment here. Please use FIRST and LAST name.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes