I just saw John’s latest post where he defends me against the “wrath” of Suzanne McCarthy. My thanks are in order. In Suzanne’s defense, though, I should point out to readers that she and I have been chatting by email as well over the last week. She’s been through a lot of abuse at the hands of complementarian thinking, so I understand the context, and in email she has not been unkind, just frank.
At any rate, for me this is a conscience issue, and so I honor the egalitarian impulse by not seeking its demise, all the while lacking a conviction to defend it for reasons already stated in previous posts. And in so doing I get to offend both sides. Familiar territory.
I think that in the interests of honestly, we should reveal that in the emails Mike said that he would be interested in meeting me at an SBL or ETS meeting and I serioulsy considered it. We also talked about many other things apart from exegesis. Mike extended friendship to me in the emails, and I have no interest in having this exhange turned into something that it wasn’t.
yep – and would still enjoying meeting at SBL regional if you are there. Let me know if you plan to attend.
I would really love to go sometime, but …. I don’t know.
I wonder if you would consider removing your link to John’s post since some very unfortunate ad hominem comments about me have been made there. I feel that blog etiquette would indicate that ad hominem remarks should be moderated out. Thanks so much.
which one (the “thanks” one?)
doesn’t matter now – its okay