Twitter says I can have my account back if I will delete the Tweet that offended their censors' notion of civil propriety. For the record, I would be happy to do that. I have even written them and offered to to that.
However—
They also expressly stated that by deleting the Tweet I would be formally admitting I broke Twitter's rules against "hate speech," and that is something I cannot conscientiously do.
This is a classic example of how social media moguls are attempting to overrule and reshape the consciences of their users. My Tweet was not an expression of "hate" aimed at anyone—not even the drag-queen crossing guard into whose custody kindergartners have been placed (contrary to many parents' wishes)—not even the teacher who boasted on Instagram how she was inculcating LGBTQRSTU ideology into the minds of her elementary students while keeping her moral agenda secret from parents. My Tweet (like this blog entry) was a simple statement of my own moral convictions, without malice or ill-will.
Several have urged me to go ahead and delete the offending Tweet rather than be silenced. I will be happy to do that if Twitter will state in writing that they understand my compliance with their wishes is not a guilty plea.
I'm not asking for anyone to start a campaign about this. I'm simply explaining (for the sake of many who keep asking) why I'm off Twitter and why I haven't done what Twitter is asking me to in order to get my account restored.
4 comments:
Dear Phil,
I am sorry to go off-topic on this post, but I do not know another way to reach you, so I am reaching out here. In roughly 2010 you published on the Ligonier website a critique of the work of NT Wright. Since the exchange between John Piper and Wright with their books in 2007-2009 (and Wright's republication of his book in 2016), the debate on justification seems to have been rather silent, while Wright has been prolific in writing and refining his position. I recently became aware that NT Wright's PhD students are becoming professors at Christian colleges and universities. This seems concerning, so I would like to learn where the past 10-12 years has taken us: Has Wright demonstrated his view is basically correct, and no longer to be challenged? Would you be willing to help me find resources to get updated? If so, is there a way I can reach you? Thank you -- Bob
Wright's popularity among American evangelicals has always mystified me. He does not enjoy that level of trust and admiration among British evangelicals.
I don't believe he has modified his position on justification. He's tried to nuance it, and he picks at his critics, but he has not recanted anything.
Indeed, if he had truly renounced any of the tatements where he declared his contempt for substitutionary atonement and the imputation of Christ's righteousness, it would have been widely talked about. In the absence of that level of clarification, I'm not sure it's accurate to think that he has "refined" his position. His chief rhetorical skill is postmodern obfuscation, which is not the same as "refinement."
Dear Phil,
Thank you for your helpful reply. Your point on refinement is well-taken: I should have cast it as a question, which you have answered in the negative. If that is the case, it is all the more disconcerting that our children are now being taught by his PhD students at university.
Thanks again -- Bob
More time to spend with your family and friends. Ps. 90:12.
Post a Comment