Dan--often I love what you write and certainly, there are nuances to this case we may know nothing about. However, permit me a little pushback.

But let me qualify what I’m going to say that “IF what Nicolas Ortiz is saying is completely accurate."

Perhaps the question is better framed, “Should Christians sue institutions?” (I don’t think Paul or Jesus addresses this question).

It appears that an institution that is charged with protecting its charges (students) is the entity being sued, not the individual students who allegedly persecuted and even made false reports against the Ortiz. Christian or not, the school should have been on top of this. It matters not if Ortiz was a Christian, Muslim, or Hindu.

Paul’s argument is that believers should not go to court over frivolous (lit. “the smallest”) matters against each other. The 1 Corinthians 6:7 verse you quote is still in that same context and even Paul uses the words “with each other”. This is not an injunction against taking a legal grievance against anyone--and certainly this is not a suggestion that a follower of Jesus should not seek a grievance against an institution. That whole argument of Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded is referencing going to law against a brother/sister in faith. “Don’t air family grievances in pagan courts."

This is apples to oranges.

Christians on either end of the scale (progressive or traditional) have consistently used legal means to seek justice for those oppressed. Including persecuted Christians in other nations. Is that wrong? Is this what Paul or Jesus is actually addressing either in Corinth or in the Sermon on the Mount?

One should remember the cultural context of first century Rome & Palestine isn’t quite the same cultural context of the 21st century United States.

I certainly agree that many Christians have acted like the proverbial “snowflakes” they denounce and see persecution (and play the persecution card) where there is none. And, on principle, I also agree that we should endure persecution with patience and gentleness. However, in this case we see a troubling situation where an institution failed a Christian student (again, allegedly).

Where an institution may fail a Christian student, it could then fail a Muslim student, or a Hindu student or one of any faith. By defending Nicolas we could also be preventing mistreatment of an innocent observant student of any faith. (This has happened before with other faiths).

I understand the difficulty--Christians have so often oversold their cases. But shouldn’t we give a bit of the benefit of a doubt until all facts come out?

Again, I qualify all of this with--“if what we read from Nicolas Ortiz’ press is accurate.” I reserve the right to change my mind on this case as further information comes to light.

Thanks, Dan. Again, I like your thoughts. So I hope this “push back” is seen as from someone who only occasionally disagrees!