Letters You Clearly Haven’t Read Yet

God has used you in mighty ways in my life and the life of many of my congregants. I am wrestling with how to take our congregation from being a “grape juice” congregation into using wine during communion . . . and that got me thinking. . . .You assert that to not drink wine during communion is sin—and I have begun to agree with you! But what would you say to another group who looks at your practice of ingesting wine and says, “Yes, fine and good, but Jesus ate an entire meal with His disciples. You’re sinning because you only have a sip of wine and a morsel of bread. You’re sinning because you aren’t drinking or eating ENOUGH.” What would be your response as I am friends with a dear brother who argues for such a position?

Iowa Pastor

I’m at a Baptist church with great Kingdom mindedness. But my son is almost 2, unfortunately not baptized, but we have a conviction that he is a member of the covenant so we have withheld him from the kids’ church program that he may participate with the body of saints on the Lord’s day thus far in his life. A few weeks ago I & some other members from my church were confronted by the pastor and merely encouraged to put our children into the program instead of keeping them in service with us. The “encouragement” which was determined to be just that, has now evolved into texts from the pastor saying that the service is getting noisy and that we need to put our children in the program and get on board with the direction of the rest of the church.
Is keeping children in the worship service something worth fighting for or should I out of honor oblige?

IS

On “The Great Shantytown Plausibility Structure”:
Everything you’re saying regarding Columbia and what’s going on being tied to the philosophical fallacy of secularism is true, but there’s also something else that is failing to be addressed (or even named) by most of Christianity with respect to these protests:
There are well funded agitators and fomenters driving the entire thing, and aided in every way by the media. Just as with the BLM riots in 2016 and 2020 (and right on schedule, in fact . . .) the entire situation is being manufactured into the public sphere of attention, and Christians are predictably providing the exact reaction these agitators are looking for—reacting to the issue du jour instead of calling out that society is being played for fools.
This is one area where James Lindsay has been dead on: For Marxists the issue is never the issue, the reaction is the issue.

Ian

Trinitarian question for you. Why is it appropriate to refer to the Holy Spirit as “God’s Spirit” and Christ as “God’s Son”, but not appropriate to refer to the Father as “God’s Father”?

Cooper

In one of your letters you advised to learn as much as you can and keep as much as you can to yourself. Implementing that principle has been extremely liberating for me. Thank you!
However, recently, a friend thanked me and feels extremely grateful because I had pestered him to join a sound church for about ten years, and now he and his family are members of a sound church, and they’ve tasted the good fruit and cannot go back.
If I were to ask myself, what would I have wanted someone to do if I was ignorant of a weighty issue such as being part of good church or a not so weighty issue such as having bad breath, I think would want to be told, be badgered about it, and even be sharply rebuked. This desire to be told/hit by the truth is of course in hindsight of having accepted the truth. For surely before I accept the truth, I’d be wishing that the person/friend stop annoying me about it. But if I were to wise up, I would surely be grateful to those that were blunt about the truth. I’m certain most of us have stories of people who were maybe even rude to us about some of our shortcomings that we later in life, maybe much later, felt grateful for. I want to help my friends see things they should. I want others, at least those who call me a friend, to help me see things that I should.
So, my questions then are
1) is there a balance between, on one hand, being prudent, keeping information to oneself, answering to the point and only when a question is asked or advice sought, and on the hand, being the person who informs/badgers people about issues that would, of course, in my opinion, be good for them? For example, if I see a church member self-deprecating a lot, do I tell them that that is unbecoming of a man, and it isn’t true humility? Or do I just keep that information, that I learnt later than I would’ve like to, to myself?
2) If yes, what principles do I use to stay balanced?
3) Are there any books or resources you would recommend on dealing with this topic?
Thanks,

J

What advice would you give for someone who holds strongly to all the distinctives of the CREC, has young children they want to commune, and loves the music, liturgy, and culture of the CREC but the only CREC church within driving distance has leadership that are evil (and I do not say this lightly)? It’s getting worse: is it better to stay where we are and keep our heads down and ignore what they are doing, or leave (Prov. 15:17)? The only other option is a large, run-of-the-mill PCA church at which we would have a hard time feeling at home and our children could not commune.
Is it honest to take communion from elders, support them with our tithe, and submit to their authority and teaching when we know them to be wicked men?
Many others in the church are unhappy with the leadership and know them to be dangerous but have no recourse and feel they are being held theologically hostage.

Q

Hey Doug, Pigweed and Crowhill (that’s me) did a podcast on Christian Nationalism in which we rely somewhat on your interview with the Babylon Bee boys. You might like it.

Greg

I have recently began reading “The Age of Reason” by Thomas Paine, in which he promotes the religion of Deism and claims that the God of the Bible is a myth and the Bible a book of fables. In pages 153-6 of his book, he says the following:
“The history of Jesus Christ is contained in the four books ascribed to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. — The first chapter of Matthew begins with giving a genealogy of Jesus Christ ; and in the third chapter of Luke there is also given a genealogy of Jesus Christ. Did these two agree, it would not prove the genealogy to be true, because it might nevertheless be a fabrication ; but as they contradict each other in every particular, it proves falsehood absolutely. If Matthew speaks truth, Luke speaks falsehood ; and if Luke speaks truth, Matthew speaks falsehood : and as there is no authority for believing one more than the other, there is no authority for believing either ; and if they cannot be believed even in the very first thing they say, and set out to prove, they are not entitled to be believed in any thing they say afterwards. Truth is an uniform thing; and as to inspiration and revelation, were we to admit it, it is impossible to suppose it can be contradictory. Either then the men called apostles were imposters, or the books ascribed to them have been written by other persons, and fathered upon them, as is the case in the Old Testament . . .
The entire book—which I have noticed is not on your website’s Reading List of Completed Books—has left me questioning my faith, and this alleged contradiction in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 is just one of the biggest reasons why that is. My first thought when thinking about this was that maybe Luke 3 is really talking about Jesus’s ancestry through Mary, but this article pretty much demolished that idea. What do you think is really going on with these passages? Please respond with your thoughts.

Samuel

This may be widely understood and missed it but I have never read or heard any teaching regarding what seems to me to be the rich young rulers real spiritual barrier to inheriting eternal life, that of his self-righteousness, not his wealth. That is where the conversation between him and Christ was originally focused. If the young ruler had not answered Christ’s question regarding keeping the commandments in such a smug way by stating he had kept all the commandments from his youth, but had been more like the publican in Luke 18, beating his chest and asking Christ to be merciful to him a sinner, I wonder if Christ would have actually found it necessary to go after the young rulers wealth?
Certainly, the publican and the young ruler both had access to the same commandments and understanding of the God’s Law but, one found true righteousness through repentance and the other was looking for an angle to eternal life that was no doubt self serving, notwithstanding the possibility, as you eluded to, that the young ruler might have been John Mark who did eventually did find true righteousness. Of course this does not remove the issue of wealth being a barrier to the kingdom but the discussion, going from commandment keeping to giving away his wealth has always struck me as more of a self-righteous problem for the young ruler than one of wealth since wealth is not necessarily a barrier as self-righteousness is most certainly a barrier.

Rob

If a family with a passel of kids has determined that the only way they’ll be able to afford to keep up Christian school for all the kids is for mom to go back to work when the youngest kids reach school age, how would you approach that tradeoff? Does it change anything if the job in question would be teaching at the Christian school the older kids already attend? Thanks,

Matt

In case this might ever be useful for a post: a claymore mine with “This Side Towards Wilson” on the front. Loved your Tucker Carlson interview and the Nuance session!

Tim

Simple curiosity prompted this question, but maybe there will be accompanying
good effects from your answer . . .
Please, what exactly are some of those places in the Westminster Confession
(ha :) . . . where no white man has ever set foot?
Thank you and very good regards!

Robert

I wanted to briefly extend a thanks to your ministry, and your constant “barking.”
Your writing has helped me understand rhetoric and argument to a greater extent, even after going through two years BCS. Even more importantly, as a Christian who has existed in a pop-Evangelical fog, your writing has helped me understand, know and appreciate the Godness of God, which in turn has instilled a greater fear of God. Why are the simplest, clearest truths sometimes the hardest to absorb? But I’ve slowly started to absorb a littler better as I read or listen to your stuff, and the stuff on Canon. Throughout your writing, there is always an ultimate presumption, or rather a primordial acknowledgement of the on True and Living God. I’m striving to imitate you in that manner now. All of Christ for all life. All praise be to Him.
Anyway, please, no need to respond. Just wanted to say thank you and God bless.
“But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called ‘today,’ that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.” Hebrews 3:13
Best regards,

Michael

I have read much of what Mr. Wilson has written, and things also written about him. My conclusion is that he thrives on controversy as a way to make himself heard and to get followers, not in order to point to Jesus and His works, and His way. Case in point. Mr. Wilson claims we should not as Christians, engage in foul speech and points to Scriptures that support this. Then he turns around and excuses his own coarse speech by claiming it is needed to meet the enemy on their own ground when it’s called for. Sounds like he is more interested in doing things his way than how God has instructed us to handle our enemies—HIS enemies. He is a compromiser and a poor influence. We are dealing with a young man in our congregation who seems more interested in what Doug Wilson says than the Bible and my husband, the head elder, has to deal with him now since our pastor died a few months ago.
P.S. And you are incredibly arrogant as well

Barbara

I was wondering if you had any teachings on the so called Palestinians origins, or the origins and history of Palestine Thank you

Frank

Concerning your blog post on Christian Nationalism, please refer to Bill Federer’s historical look at Christian “nationalism.”
We cannot let the globalists redefine truth and co-opt language. The correct term is Christian patriotism.

Charles

Please help me square your views on immigration with the Gospel. I cannot bear cognitive dissonance. I am a Christ follower who has also been reading your books and following your blog now for a couple of years. I am 95% with you. In your Tucker Carlson interview, you said 1) That we can’t have unbridled immigration because it would mess up the “shared moral consensus” and 2) You use the analogy of the foster care dad who is asked to take in more foster children. I think both of these arguments are off the mark. First, if as you claim, our nation is so far gone that there is not even a political solution, then what “shared moral consensus” are the hordes of immigrants going to threaten? In fact, for much of the last half century most immigrants have come from Catholic countries. Wouldn’t their cultural assumptions and traditions actually assist in the transformation of the U.S. into a Christian nation? Even if they aren’t all Christian, I would argue that folks from the global south would be much more likely to be conservative and God-fearing than Western European immigrants. With regard to the foster care dad argument, immigrants are not coming into your home. For the most part they are looking to rent, build, or buy their OWN homes. Some might start as refugees, but the story of immigration in America is most often one of striving young men and women coming, working, and starting (bigger than your average American) families. Finally, I think it’s a matter of Christian justice and charity to let more immigrants in. I would encourage you to research what the legal pathway is for an uneducated, poor Mexican, Guatemalan, Ethiopian, etc . . . person to immigrate here. You will find that it’s usually decades. Meanwhile we’ll be eating our 25 cent bananas from Guatemala. Why do the bananas only cost 25 cents? Is it not unjust that we allow freedom of movement for products but not of the people who made the products? As my favorite Christian band Five Iron Frenzy said, “You could end their suffering, but all you want is everything.” We have plenty of resources. The enemy at the gates is NOT the immigrant—Please help me see why I am wrong, if I am wrong. Thanks for all you do.

Curt

I have the joy and privilege of courting a beautiful young woman, and if everything continues apace, we will be getting married in a few months, Lord willing. I have one concern though, and I’d appreciate your advice. She is very, very close to her family, and does not like to be by herself for long periods of time. She’s grown up with 5 younger siblings, and rarely spends time without them. My dilemma is this: when, Lord willing, we marry, she’s going to be at home by herself for long periods of time while I’m away working. We’ve talked about it, and she’s admitted that she will be very lonely at home alone, so much so that she’d like to have one of her siblings live with us. Obviously she doesn’t want that, nor do I want that for her, but I don’t have a great solution to the problem and I’m not totally on board with the sibling idea just yet. I want what’s best for her, especially spiritually and emotionally, but I don’t see a solution to this problem.
Thank you for your ministry, especially the Family Series, those books profoundly changed my life!

Reagan

In your post, “Was John Calvin An Intolerista?” you stated that Servetus’ execution was a sin and a blunder. Would you please expand, theologically, on why it was a sin?
I’m currently reading Poythress’s book on the law of God, in which he engages with Greg Bahnsen on whether heresy should be punished by the state. Your thoughts would be very welcome.
In Christ,

JP

My wife and I (and three week daughter!) love your content and are so blessed reading everything from your family. I also, just signed up for Canon+ I notice there are lots of books on being a good husband and lots of content in various forms on being a father to sons. But I can’t seem to find anything regarding how to best father daughters. How about a book?

Andrew

Would you agree with Aaron Renn that the church needs to do more pre-evangelism (i.e. telling people who Jesus is before sharing the gospel)? In “Life in the Negative World,” Renn argues that modern America doesn’t just hate God. They have also completely forgotten who He is.
I don’t know if I agree with pre-evangelism because it often leads to stuff like the “He Gets Us” ads. I fear that pre-evangelism forgets that it is the Holy Spirit who regenerates a person, not us. Since it is God who changes hearts, we do not need to make the Lord more “marketable” to unbelievers. I understand that pre-evangelism has good intentions, but I fear it might make the church “seeker-sensitive” again.
I would love to hear your counsel on this matter.
Thanks,

Brandon

What you said regarding Mark 10:23-31 is terrific. I think the thing that puzzles me with a part of it has to do with the phrase “now in this time”, because many of us have seen more of the “hundredfold persecutions” here on earth than the other stuff. Any thoughts to help expand/clarify on that?

Guymon

On a Million Camels:
Pastor,
I have roundly rejected the “health & wealth” preachers, and I do not take your take on this passage as being that. But I am also puzzling over your conclusion. Perhaps I have not yet realized the truth that would have me astonished “out of measure.”
In my own studies, I have concluded that what Jesus is saying is 1) wealth is not bad but a blessing, 2) those who trust in their wealth are wrong-headed, but it’s the head that’s wrong, not the wealth, 3) those who give it all away are lined up for special blessings, and 4) those blessings come in multiples of what they gave away.
Now, because Jesus says if we leave family, we will gain multiples of family (including wives), I don’t conclude that I will actually have multiple mommies (or wives). But it seems to me that when I sacrifice my material blessings for the sake of the gospel, I wind up invariably on the receiving end of hundreds of other people’s charity. In other words, someone who gives away his wealth for Jesus’ sake ends up receiving from many, many other people the same sort of material blessings. He gains hundreds of “brothers” and “sisters” and “fathers” and “mothers” all behaving like family. Still working on the “wives” part . . . but also hundreds of “homes” and “lands” and “camels” and “etc.”
So . . . are my scare quotes unnecessary, or are they exactly the point? I know for myself I left my extended family, my land, my home, my tractor, my friends, and even a couple of kids to pursue the calling God placed on me. But since then, I have gained countless multiples of all those things—except the tractor, but I bet I have access to a bunch of those, too, just for the asking.
Is this too simplistic or spiritualistic, or is this pretty much what Jesus meant? ‘Cause it seems like a natural reading, and it certainly fits with my own experience. Or . . . are you seeing something completely different and more glorious than that?

Andy

Regarding “Excesses of the Wahoo Brethren”
Around 1998 as a teenager I attended a Pentecostal church in Olympia, WA. My efforts to follow Christ was to pray little and feel guilty about not reading my bible; I obviously had some items to work on in life. Of course, there were the summer and winter camps and revival meetings to get myself straight, full of emotional highs, and subsequent lows, where much preaching of the word happened. At one particular meeting a speaker was “slaying people in the spirit”, of which I wanted to partake so that . . . well, maybe my relationship with Christ would improve. Not sure on that one, anyhow, I walked up front and the moment the speaker touched my forehead I felt something like a jolt of electricity, I went as limp as a bone fish, and I fell to the ground . . . and immediately sat up since the feeling ceased, and returned to my seat. I thought to myself . . . “ooooohhhhkkaaaay.”
A few month down the road nothing in my efforts to follow Christ changed. There was no sign of any change. Where was the Holy Spirit? Am I saved? I asked myself, what was the point of being knocked down and the high emotion services, if it didn’t change me for more than 24 hours? I finally decided, as with the big push to speak in tongues, that I would not seek those experiences (slain in Spirit) by forcing them, rather let God convict me if they were indeed important to God, and ignore otherwise. To put it simply, it was necessary to daily seek Christ, not try to find Him at summer camp. Years later I was recalling the experience of being knocked down, and a small, but clear thought popped into my head “was that even of God?” I lean more towards that it was a seeking signs and wonders, thing, than anything good. After 15 years at a Calvary Chapel, which I enjoyed thoroughly, God kindly arranged circumstances to get me to a CREC in Centralia, WA, and now I wish I had been there all along. Now the new push is for beards and cigars(not here in Centralia though) . . . but I jest, mostly.
Cheers,

David

Not certain how to direct this—I’m looking for an authentic staunchly reformed church body in Switzerland with whom I might connect, for the purpose of a visit. Any point of contact or advise as to how I’d go about it are greatly appreciated and God’s hand on your work.

Joe

I’ve known about you for several years, but it wasn’t until recently that I started listening to you—it’s already been a great blessing to me! I want to read some of your material but to your credit, you’re prolific and so I’m not sure where to even begin. Could you recommend 5 (or so) of your more practical/applied books to dive into first? For context, I’m a 27-year-old male and I’ve been married for a couple years, (no kids, although hopefully that changes soon!). I attend a faithful church and personally hold to the 1689 2LBCF—so if your recommendations contain minimal pesky paedobaptist shenanigans, it would be appreciated ;).
Thanks Doug, may God bless you!
Yours in Christ,
P.S. Have you ever worn red and secretly thought to yourself, “I’d make a mean Santa Claus”?

MM

Sparked by the war in the Middle East, the Right is currently embroiled in a debate over the ethics of war, and what constitutes a just war.
The example of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is often pointed to. Some say (Ben Shapiro, for example) “it was morally right to drop the a-bombs because it meant less people died overall.” Some others say (Tucker Carlson, for example) “it was morally wrong to drop the a-bombs because man is playing God and it’s plain murder to drop a bomb on people.”
How do you process this problem theologically? On which side of the fence do you land?
I sympathize with the utilitarian argument, because I naturally prefer less people to die. I also understand that we enter dangerous territory when we start deciding who gets to live and who doesn’t, based on a hypothetical. But if we take this to its natural conclusion, it means that it is never right to make a strategically preemptive strike ever. Because in so doing, you are calculating that if I attack now, I will save more lives in the long run. However, this appears to border on stupidity in certain circumstances where a preemptive strike might be essential for protecting the citizens of a country.
As I write this, I realise that I am actually just describing the Trolley Problem. So, to significantly simplify the question—should you shift the tracks in the Trolley Problem?
Regards in Christ,

Harry

Thanks for everything you do. I know some people involved in stock trading. Do you think it is ethical for a Christian to trade stocks based only on observed technical / economic patterns? It is hard to see if this type of trading provides any service.
Some edge cases seem clearer: there are some company stocks I wouldn’t want to own at all based on what the company does, and some types of the ultra-fast trading seem unfair. Excluding those edge cases, the situation seems more murky.
Thanks,

Andrew

Does your view of the Jews necessitate foreign policy support of the nation of Israel? What is your general view of us giving money to foreign nations? I listen to a lot of conservatives pundits complain about the budget bills and how much we are giving away. How do we think about this Christianly?

Shea

I’m curious as to why you support Israel. Do you believe in human rights, especially the right to freedom of religion? Do you have a right to force your religion on others? Do others have a right to force their religion on you? How would you feel if someone tried? You claim to have “affection for Jews.” But does God love the Palestinians? Do the Palestinians have a right to freedom of religion? I’m anxious to get your answers.

Justice

Biblical Child Rearing in an Age of Therapeutic Goo (1) and (3)
I have a question.
I’ve been pro spanking and recently was reading up on the gentle parenting movement’s arguments against it from a biblical perspective. They go about excusing the child in proverbs as being an adolescent among other things. I found it unconvincing, and took the line of thought you first mention in Biblical Child Rearing in an Age of Therapeutic Goo 3. We are supposed to parent as God does. But thinking about God’s example from the Bible I am a bit confused as to how God parents. He seems to set his children loose for great periods of time and then have a firm hand for a time, and so the cycle continues. This is an over simplification, but how would you describe God’s parenting style?
Curiously—

John

You are a Protestant, you naturally write for Protestants. Still, in your FAQ on Christian Nationalism, I was a tad disappointed you elided any reference to Catholic integralism.
I’d be much obliged if you could sketch out your thoughts on the integralist project. Is it a form of Christian Nationalism? If not, why not? Is there room for Catholic integralists and Christian Nationalists to work together? Would an integralist state be part of Christendom—or at odd with it?
Thanks in advance!

SW

Thanks for all your content. It seems that when Christians like yourself stand for Reformed theology in all its aspects (patriarchy, Calvinism, biblical cultural engagement etc) the ones who push back the most are other professing Christians. How do you differentiate your serrated edge approach when you get push back about these things from other Christians who try and say you are making non essential things essential. Often what I hear is “we just focus on the gospel”. Appreciate your feedback.

JJT