Contents
Biographies
You have mentioned in multiple places that reading biographies can be a very helpful thing to do if you are a first generation Christian and don’t have many godly examples to look up to. For men, what are your top 3 bios you’d recommend ? Especially for men who have struggled with the sin of abdication and passivity.J
J, you will not get everything you need from one person’s life, obviously, but for the kind of thing you have in mind, I would recommend Dallimore’s two volumes on Whitefield. Iain Murry is good on Jonathan Edwards.
A Broken Situation
I am a married man of almost 15 years with 4 children who has broken trust with his wife in multiple ways. Chiefest amongst them in my view is prior to marriage subtly deceiving her Dad in a manner that might have prevented the marriage from ever happening had the truth been known fully (the issue had to do with 2nd tier Christian theological beliefs). It’s a long and complicated story . . . but there it is. Think of us as the Romeo and Juliet of the CREC and Big Eva . . . Hopefully with a different ending. I also sinned against her by viewing pornography for many years after we were married.
By God’s grace, I have repented of my sin. I stopped looking at porn 6 years ago and have given my wife access to all my devices. I got accountability software that she and 2 other men can review and I am in relationship with multiple men at church where we confess our sin and pray together on a weekly basis. I have been doing this faithfully for 3 years and have noticed my love increase for the Lord, my wife, my children, and the church. We did 2 years of marriage counseling and I also confessed to her father a couple years ago what I did and sought his forgiveness which he extended to me.
Most of my life I always identified with the older brother, but in the last few years, God in His kindness has given me eyes to see myself as the prodigal too, covered in pig filth. I know what the prodigal felt like when he said, “father, I am no longer worthy to be called your son.” What I did was so wicked. I have so much regret over how I handled myself as a man. But thankfully I now also know what it feels like to have the Father embrace me and welcome me home.
I have no regret at all that I am married to my wife. She truly is a gift and a delight. She is beautiful inside and out and a wonderful wife and mother. And if we hadn’t gotten married, it’s hard to imagine my life that does not include her or our wonderful children. Today, in faith, I am resting in the finished work of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection for the forgiveness of my sin and for my adoption as a beloved son of God. I love my wife very much and I want to be a better man going forward than I was starting out.
My question has to do with trust. I feel like I have made consistent and substantial changes that she and others can see over a fairly significant amount of time in an effort to rebuild trust between us. But she still does not trust me fully. I know trust and forgiveness are not the same, (I believe she has forgiven me) and that trust must be earned . . . and it makes sense that we would have trust issues given all I have done to her, but how long will this last?
She has requested that I stay off all social media and other various apps, and I have obliged her (which is hard because I eventually want to fight in the public square like you, but my marriage and family are priority). But now she is asking me to share with her anything I wish to discuss in men’s group that is related to her or our marriage prior to me sharing it so that she can let me know if she is ok with me sharing it or to give feedback on how she would prefer me to frame it. This feels wrong and unhealthy to me. I want to protect my wife’s reputation when I speak about her and so I have made a practice of focusing on my own sin and shortcomings instead of hers when discussing any marital conflict. But, getting her approval over how I speak about something or if I speak about something just feels emasculating. Is this the cost of building back trust?
What limits should I have with regard to her requests? And for how long? And also, she wants me to confess lustful thoughts if I ever have them or sexual temptations even if I take those thoughts captive (I do this with men in my church and I view taking thoughts captive as a victory not a sin). Sharing sexual thought sins with my wife seems unwise and unhealthy to me.
What a mess…
Thanks for any insight you can provide from a distance. Your ministry has been a huge help to me as I’ve been trying to navigate picking up all the broken pieces I’ve caused.Anon
Anon, confessing temptations is a great way for the devil to get you on a squirrel cage run. That is really unwise. Confessing sin is one thing, confessing temptations quite another. That said, men’s accountability groups can lapse into overshare territory. I would encourage you to have a talk with your wife about the principles that should govern what you share and what you don’t. There should be some things you don’t. What are the rules? And last, you asked about time. The way you measure that would be through looking at her readiness to accept your spiritual leadership in other areas of the home. If she is being tempted not to cede anything back to you because you are now perpetually in the doghouse, this is a sign that your accountability set-up has become counter-productive.
Fluff or Substance?
I am writing, first to thank you for sharing your wisdom and wealth of knowledge. My family and I have grown so much in Christ through interacting with your work. Second, I would like to ask your advice if you have the time to share it. My church, located in a small town in Texas, often does women’s Bible studies; and while I appreciate the effort of our women’s ministry I’ve often found the studies to be lacking. I do acknowledge that some of this lies with me and my preferences. That being said, I would like to challenge our ministry to go beyond the simple fluff studies that are so prevalent. Do you have any suggestions of books I could take to the ministry team for a women’s Bible study?
On a separate note I’ve recently been reading your book on productivity and have thoroughly enjoyed your insights. Thank you again and God bless.
Love and prayers,CB
CB, it depends. I think women’s studies should be substantive, not fluff, but I think they should be focused on the vocation and calling of women. So I would recommend books like Barbara Mouser’s Five Aspects, or my Bekah’s Eve in Exile, or Nancy Pearcy’s Love Thy Body.
Hard Times Ahead
You recently said something along the lines of marrying a less educated a woman is taking the easy way out.
1) Why belittle preference? I want to marry a woman who’s as submissive as Sarah. Calling your husband “lord” has implications. Of course, no human authority is absolute, and she should tell me to f— off if I tell her to disobey Christ, but for everything else, she ought obey me “in everything” (Eph 5). If she doesn’t know God’s laws for whatever reason (she doesn’t have a good dad), I’ll teach her. So, she’s equipped to tell me or anyone else to f— off when required.
2) Like it’s easier for you to work with aggressive high-T men rather than low-T men, I prefer a submissive woman. I can tell her what to read, what to study, and I can clarify her doubts, but I’d rather have someone less educated than these highly educated, unruly, feminist b—-es. Also, just think about the numbers. How easy do you think it is to find as you described a highly educated woman who hates feminism? It’s much easier to find an uneducated woman who hasn’t been corrupted by it.
3) Unlike for some men, I don’t need a woman to make me stand up straight. A woman is and never will be the reason I’d want to stand up straight. I have strong, wise men I look up to. I have good mentors. When I get into trouble, I call my boys. At work, it’s men I seek counsel from. I don’t need the woman for anything other than indulgence and child-rearing. What I need her to do is cook, clean, take care of our kids, and shut the f— up. Iron not clay sharpens iron. A woman chief adviser? That’s just gay. Sure for certain things such as maybe nutrition, medicine, house decoration, or anything else that’s not important in the grand scheme of things that the husband doesn’t have the bandwidth for, sure, go for it, be the chief adviser. But for everything important, you want the counsel of strong, wise men. I don’t want to talk about myself, but what about the men who are already standing up as straight as they can. What great counsel do you think his newly wed wife will give him that he has not already gotten and implemented? Sure she may have some great insight as she grows older and wiser, but she must give it only when asked for it. Basically, she ought to first know her place. She must have learnt submission before taking on the advisory role.
4) Don’t underestimate the time and effort required to be a good homemaker. There’s a lot for a woman to do. I’d rather my wife focus on homemaking and making sure I’m happy than trying to be my chief adviser. Most woman nowadays have no clue how to be productive or a good homemaker. It is undeniable that men today work five times harder than their grandpa for a woman twenty times worse than their grandma.
Thanks,John
John, for all kinds of reasons, too many to list here, I am afraid that you are headed for some really hard times, the origins of which you probably won’t understand.
Teasing Out a Corollary to Life in Girl World
If it is true that hypergamy remains a dominant dynamic in play—over and against statements made by the fairer sex and various platitudes spouted by contemporary culture—would you counsel a young man who graduated Bible college and seminary without landing a bride to pursue a pastoral position to improve his position, prospects, and possibilities? If not, are there particular vocational fields commended to pursuit that would particularly help prepare him for eventual pastoral service, while remaining actively involved on a volunteer basis in the local church
Having ascertained through long observation and experience that I do not possess the same gift Paul claims for himself in I Corinthians 7 (whatever the assigned contemporary term), I suspect I ended up in a less than ideal position, and a survey of fellow grads indicates there may be more of us facing the same dilemma
I recognize there may be risks in both paths, but I don’t know if there is a preferred path to chart according to the wisdom of the Word and the way God made the world.Dawson’s Discombobulated Friend
DDF, that depends entirely on what kind of pastor you would be. If courageous, aggressive, and Christ-centered, then yes, that would be good. But men can be passive and off-putting in the pulpit as much as anywhere else.
Sabbath Q
I’m thankful for your ministry and how the Lord has used you.
I’ve recently come to the conviction that the Sabbath still needs to be kept but am still working on the specifics of how to actually keep it. I know to rest from worldly employment and worship the Lord, but besides that I’m not sure. Ive seen you’ve written elsewhere that the Sabbath is supposed to be a delight and that you take a small exception to the Westminster on this topic. Do you have anything you’ve written on the matter/anything you’ve read that’s been helpful?
Thank you in advance and Blessings!Sam
Sam, I would recommend that you start with The Taste of Sabbath.
Nazis and Sexual Degeneracy
One claim being made by the Nazi apologists is that if the Nazis had prevailed, the kind of sexual degeneracy we see everywhere in the West today would not be a feature of modern life. This claim is naive. While it is true that the Nazis raged against the sexual degeneracy that was commonplace in the Weimar Republic, that rage was lashing out at what they regarded as features or consequences of liberalism and a Jewish presence in Germany. Eventually, a Nazi-conquered Europe would have tolerated the same kind of sexual degeneracy, but they would have justified it as a product of tradition, as though changing the color of the whorepaint makes it better.
The commonplace sodomy and pederasty of Greece and Rome had nothing to do with Jews or liberalism. It’s a truism, but it is also actually true that heathens will do what heathens tend to do. But I can do more than recite a truism; I can actually show the work. Nazism would eventually tolerate all of the modern perversions that the revisionists blame on Jews and liberalism because Nazism was a neo-pagan movement, not a Christian revival.
To maintain a stable concept of sexual degeneracy, one must think about sexuality like a Christian: one must countenance the idea of a sin-corrupted nature—that unregenerate men are internally driven to do what God did not intend for them to do. In the Christian conception of sexuality, there are two different ways of speaking of “nature” or “the natural.” One way is to speak of nature or the natural as that which God intended. That’s what we in the West mean when we speak of sodomy or transvestism as “unnatural” or “against nature.” The other way of speaking of nature or the natural is to reference the internal corruption of sin that makes it impossible for men to obey God without Christian regeneration.
Paganism cannot countenance this way of thinking about nature and the natural. The idea that man’s nature has been corrupted by sin and is in need of regeneration is repugnant to pagans. It’s a blaze orange tell that white Nazi sympathizers will tend to associate sexual depravity with the other. They’ll say it’s something Jewish, or something black—something people of an inferior nature would do: members of noble races could never be moved by such impulses. Inevitably, they will have to confront the truth that undeniably white people are every bit as inclined toward sexual deviance as every other tribe. And then the justification will start; then they’ll go looking for whorepaint in Europe’s pagan past.Daniel
Daniel, yes, and thank you.
Civil War Books
Aside from your own and Steve Wilkins’ books, what resources would you recommend on the Civil War/South?Sam
Sam, I would start with Eugene Genovese’s A Consuming Fire, and Noll’s Civil War as Theological Crisis.
Paul and Barnabas
This question is not in reference to a post of yours, but I was wondering if you have written anything on the dust-up between Paul and Barnabas over Mark’s desertion, and how one should understand what occurred between these two faithful men that led to their separation in ministry. If not, is there something you could recommend? I have been trying to contextualize this whole incident within my overall understanding of Scripture, and after many years I am still struggling to figure out where and how this fits . . . I greatly respect your logic and wisdom, and I am grateful for any guidance you might be able to offer on how to make sense of what happened there…Michael
Michael, I do have a “take” on what happened there, but have not written on it in any detail. But I am currently preaching through Acts, and plan on devoting some time to that incident. It was a big deal. Should be there in a few more months.
Prayer Without Doubting
My apologies, as I’m sure you’ve spoken about this before, but a quick question— point blank, what does praying without doubting look like? If you’re praying for healing, or more children, should you just joyfully expect that to be answered? Is that faith without doubting? Or just presumptuous? Between the grifters in the megachurches and the modern God-really-doesn’t-answer-but-praying-is-good-for-us teaching it’s foggy.
I know more goes into answered prayers than that, but that particular question has me stuck.
Thank you!H
H, I would start with training wheels—meaning that we should learn the discipline of praying God’s Word back to Him first. When that is in place, then I would start making forays into particular requests. Two good books to help with this would be Kenneth Boa’s Handbook for Prayer, and Matthew Henry’s A Method for Prayer.
Public School in a Christian Nation?
What would schooling look like under a Christian nation? Would the federal government play a role in education anymore? Would public schools be abolished?
Thank you,Noelle
Noelle, in my ideal scenario, the federal government would be completely out of education, as would state governments be. The vast majority of students would be in private academies.
Two or Three Witnesses
I had heard recently that it is a policy within at least part of the CREC that every single charge against a person must be established on the account of 2 or 3 witnesses for each instance. Is this true? If so, how do you deal with those who are exceptional at hiding their evil like pedophiles or abusers in marriage? Where there is rarely more than 1 witness, much less 2? Are there exceptions for complicated instances like pedophilia or crimes/sins that don’t lend themselves easily to being witnessed by more than 1?Kenneth
Kenneth, this is not a CREC standard, but something that is built into the principle of independent corroboration itself. If witnesses are allowed to testify about incidents that are unrelated, then there is no way to cross-test that testimony. In a biblical trial, the defendant is on trial, but so are all the witnesses. They must be accountable also.
Plain Speaking and Modesty
My wife recently started listening to a sermon series you did a while ago, and it was released on Canon+ under the series name “Feminine Modesty.” It didn’t take long for me to become captivated with the material myself—talk about fiery!
Here’s my question: It is my understanding that you are fulfilling a pastoral duty in addressing the immodesty issue from the pulpit, in great detail and authority. At one point in the series (and I’m paraphrasing) you said something along the lines of, “If you’re a legalist, you’ll become more legalistic after this series . . . if you’re enjoying your perceived ‘liberties,’ you’ll indulge them more after this series . . . only the Spirit can soften your heart in this area.”
So, as shepherd of a flock, you planted seeds and awaited for the Spirit to “water.” What do you do as pastor if those seeds don’t sprout? What if someone IS hardened further, in either direction, even after such a robust study? At what point does the pastor need to take it a step further, and flat out tell a person “you’re not living right, and you need to change or leave”?
I ask these questions as a newly ordained and installed Associate Pastor. God bless!Ben
Ben, it is a judgment call, depending on how egregious the immodesty is. But yes, there is such a line where you would speak to someone directly. What I would recommend is preaching on it again. When someone asks, “When are you going to stop preaching against immodesty?” the reply could be, “When it isn’t a problem in our congregation anymore.”
Christless Reforms
It seems like the moral engine of the 19th century was fed by eschatological fuel. Moral reforms in the 19th century (abolitionism, temperance, sabbath laws, etc) seemed like they were in pursuit of this postmil vision that Edwards identified. Do you agree that, generally, postmil eschatology drove these reforms? If so, what did they get wrong? Lastly, how does your view of Christian Nationalism differ so as to avoid the pitfalls of the 19th century? Several people skeptical about postmil reference the 19th century, and the cancer of the social gospel, as evidence it doesn’t work.
ThanksTim
Tim, yes. A lot of the social gospel work and the 19th century reforms were driven by a deracinated postmillennialism. The problem was in leaving Christ and the gospel out of it, which just results in wowserism.
Bad Colleges and Daughters
I am in full agreement about daughters going to college to solidify their knowledge of God and his glory. But, given that there are maybe 3 or maybe even just 1 college in America that lends to this reality, is it realistic to encourage daughters to pursue the university? I mean, if we make the case that daughters should pursue college, and there are 1000s that will damn them, and 1 that will be edifying, isn’t that a risky and foolish way to direct our daughters. I have been encouraging my daughters that they need not feel pressure to attend college for this very reason?B
B, by all means, do not send your daughters to colleges that will cripple or corrupt them. It is better to be uneducated than to be a clever harpy. But a good education is still good.
Public Christians
I hope that you and your family are well and that God continues to bless your ministry.
Several times I have seen non-believers respond to Christians making public affirmations of faith on social media, at abortion protests, etc. by referencing the first part of Matthew 6, implying that to do such things is to be a hypocrite. I wonder if you know of an effective, biblical response to this sort of thing.
Thank youGray
Gray, I do believe the Lord prohibits public displays of personal devotion—as in, lengthy and flowery prayers. But He does not prohibit being a Christian in public. Let you light so shine before men.
Uneven Love
“Love Must Be Uneven to Be True”
Doug,
Thank you for writing on this. It is related to my dissertation topic if I ever get it done. I was going to focus on the difference between the first and second commandments. I changed when I realized, after scouring many resources, that no one was discussing how focused the New Testament is on “one another” love (short of saying, “If you have limited money, help believers first”). I was further spurred on by discussions concerning how odd it is when pastors talk as if Christians are obligated to pay for random strangers in their town through taxation more than they are for the needs of fellow believers across the globe. This led me to wonder why, even though both (or all three) loves are there (one another, neighbor and, perhaps separate, enemy) it is love for believers that is the proof we are saints to the world (John 13:35), to God on judgment day (Matthew 25:40), and to ourselves (1 John 3:14). It’s also worth investigating why Paul’s evidence of a good church is not a “love for the city” but their faith in God and love towards all the saints. (Eph. 1:5, c.f. Phil. 1:5, Col. 1:4, 2 Thess. 1:3)
It is nice to see I am not as alone as I thought.Luke
Luke, thanks. Good thoughts.
Re: Love Must Be Unequal
Yes and amen to all you’ve written, though I have one question about the idea that “hate your enemy” was carnally inspired. This makes sense intuitively, but it seems to come into tension with the language of hatred in various psalms: Ps. 5 says that God “hates all evildoers,” and Ps. 15 says that those who dwell in God’s tent will be men “in whose eyes a vile person is despised.” The response I’ve provided to this in the past is that love and hate are not mutually exclusive, such that God can simultaneously hate a man (in one sense) for the sake of his sin (otherwise there would be no need for Christ’s intercession) and love that same man (in another sense) for the sake of Christ’s merits (thus justifying him and hiding him from the Lord’s judgement). Therefore, when Jesus says to love your enemy, it doesn’t necessarily preclude the kind of hatred mentioned above. However, you seem to suggest that hate and love are simple opposites, and I’ll admit this feels like a less strained reading of the Sermon on the Mount. What do you think of this harmonization? Would you parse it out differently? Would love to hear your thoughts.Nicholas
Nicholas, there is a kind of hatred, a carnal hatred, that the Lord rebukes in the Sermon on the Mount. There is a hatred of God’s enemies in the psalms that we are to emulate, which we know because we are instructed to sing all the psalms. But there is a distinction between God’s enemies and mine. David hated the enemies of God, but was entirely magnanimous to Saul, his personal enemy. That is the key, I think.
Humility and Justification
I am confused by the theologians and pastors who can’t make up their minds regarding the parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector in Luke 18:9-14.
Is it possible to tell on what basis the tax collector was justified? Some say it was the tax collector’s humility or faithfulness to the covenant, others say it is due to the imputation of Christ’s righteousness.
How can this knotty problem be untied? Thank you.John
John, I think it is pretty straightforward. The tax collector was repentant, and cast himself entirely on the mercy of God. He clearly did this in faith. Faith is the sole instrument for receiving the imputed righteousness of Christ. The Pharisee trusted in himself, that he was righteous, which was false.
Understanding Tragedy
What’s the difference between suffering as the result of some tragedy (disease/illness, car wreck, natural disaster, etc.) and suffering as a consequence of some sin you have committed? And what is the Christian responsibility in each?
I ask because I have heard it preached from the pulpit that we are to simply let people stew in their consequences, and that doesn’t sit right with me, either for myself or for others.A
A, there are clearly miseries that are the direct result of bad choices, like drug addiction. And there are miseries that have nothing to do with a person’s antecedent sinning—Job and the man born blind. Then there are the gray areas, where you don’t know. The only time we let people deal with their own choices would be in the first category, and then carefully, with wisdom.
Women Singing
What roles does scripture allow women in regards to singing during Sunday worship? I saw a response from you to a similar (but more specific question) regarding “special music” in the July 16, 2024 Letters section—you indicated you were fine with it in that instance. Can they lead the singing? Can they lead the singing provided an elder is leading the congregation during that time? Can they sing as part of a band/choir that is leading the congregational singing? Maybe I’m being too fastidious but if part of the reason for them not leading in teaching during a service is that it requires exercising authority over men, it seems that the kinds of commands that song leaders exhort the congregation to do (lift up their voices, raise their hands, etc as we see in Psalms) is a kind of commanding = a kind of authority and thus should be prohibited in some fashion. But to what extent if generally we are all (women included) supposed to sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs to one another? Thank you.Bryan
Bryan, at the risk of sounding arbitrary, I have no problem with women singing in the choir, but would not want a woman to be the choir director.
Bitcoin and Loving your Neighbor
Do I have an obligation to tell my family and friends about bitcoin based on Deut 22:1, “You shall not see your brother’s ox or his sheep straying away and ignore them; you shall certainly bring them back to your brother”?
Their (everyone’s) savings (that is not in bitcoin) is “straying away” (evaporating).
Thanks,John
John, you have an obligation to tell them once. After that, only if they want to hear from you. Don’t be the guy who can’t change the subject.
Again, the Finger of Johnny Cash
There’s a difference between serrated edginess and vulgarity. Why else do you decline to spell out f***?Ken
Ken . . . because there is a difference between serrated edginess and vulgarity.
Re: The Fingerbone of St. Johnny
In your defense of the NSA ad, you admit that not everyone who disagrees with you on this issue is a pearl clutcher, and you say that you are “happy to discuss” with those who are friends of NSA and Canon and who like the rest of the ad, but think the middle finger was a “distraction.” In point of fact, though, those friends are the one group with whose voice you and Canon/NSA have so far avoided engaging. Whoever runs the Canon YouTube account is still (Tuesday Sep 3) busily “liking” all positive comments on the Doug and Friends video, and replying to many, while ignoring or treating dismissively all who disagree—even substantive, thoughtful comments expressing appreciation for Canon/Moscow. You also, in your article, hand-waved away all substantive disagreement, as well.
Frankly, the middle finger part of the ad is not a distraction. It’s a mistake. A serious lapse in judgment, at best. (“Distraction,” in this situation, serves mainly to describe and characterize the Canon defense of the ad to date). This is not something that can just be adjudicated by a Bible study or looking at the scoreboard. I will affirm the Biblical legitimacy of a serrated edge, and have affirmed your use of it, but this ad was over the line and inexcusable, regardless of how many clicks you can count.
Even if I were able to grant, for the moment, Ben’s assertion that the vile sexual connotation can be disassociated from the gesture, the middle finger in the ad is gratuitous, unnecessary, transgressive, gratuitous, indefensible and gratuitous. Shackleton’s ad and the Marine Corps ad Ben mentioned didn’t need profanity in order to function effectively as a filter. Why does yours? Was the writing that weak? More to the point, what kind of person would be unpersuaded by the rest of the ad, yet deeply drawn by the middle finger part? Is that the guy you really want to reach?
Beyond that, the middle finger is something unbecoming of a warrior at any time. It’s a counterfeit for both arguments and combat. It’s juvenile, lame and impotent. It accompanies the incoherent, screeching, triggered rage that emanates from our opponents, not the active resolve and understated defiance of a warrior. “No warrior scolds. Courteous words or else hard knocks are his only language.”
Thus far the objection to the ad—even more disappointing has been the justification of it. The Doug and Friends video is a dog’s breakfast of really sloppy argumentation and hand waving. Prominent among them was repeated obfuscation of the distinction between portraying crude behavior and endorsing crude behavior. There could be 50 upthrust middle fingers being waved by people in the mobs shown in your ad, plus one shot zoomed in and held center frame for several seconds, and no one would blink. Certainly not me. That’s a portrayal, and it certainly is legitimate. It is (clearly) an entirely different matter to say, “We think flipping the bird is praiseworthy. We’re looking for Christians to engage in this behavior.” Which is what the NSA ad did. You guys are way too smart not to get that, and to pretend otherwise really comes across poorly.
Another example of sloppiness is Ben saying that “going Amelia Bedelia is not an argument,” but then Longshore does exactly that regarding crucifying the flesh, in order to justify flipping the bird.
Also, rather than just citing Biblical examples of behavior, you need to demonstrate that the actions of Jehu et al, are approved by the text, and ought to be imitated. It’s correct to model the styles of the prophets, who were clearly speaking God’s words, but just because an act is recorded doesn’t mean it’s a model for us. Maybe you can demonstrate that we should imitate Jehu, but you can’t just assume it.
Perhaps worse, though, is the assertion that anyone criticizing you on any grounds other than minor tactical considerations considers you to be the adversary, rather than wickedness. For many of us, this criticism is helping our friends do battle with wickedness. This is the crew of the Dawn Treader reminding Caspian that he can’t abdicate. This is keeping one foot on the bank, to use Rigney’s analogy. We need our friends. Please stay with us.
Since we believe in stories here, let me help situate this one by pointing out some parallels with a prominent contemporary political figure. Like him, you guys have provided a voice to a lot of people despised and ignored by the establishment. Like him, you guys are loved for speaking obvious truths that are considered impolite to utter. Like him, you have a connection with your supporters that cannot be broken by your enemies. But, like him, failure to listen to the correction of your friends can be your undoing. Please consider this humbly.
I have read your stuff since C/A on dead tree back in the 90’s (thanks very much for the introduction to Wodehouse), and my wife has benefited greatly from Nancy’s and your daughters’ work. She is currently listening to your series on modesty. I have read “A Serrated Edge” and I affirm the arguments and its use. Also “Joy at the End of the Tether,” several of your novels (“Flags Out Front” probably favorite), and some other books. Several of Nate’s books, too. I was on your side for the “Mood” discussion, and assured my wife that the criticisms were off the mark. I am praying that I was right.Matt
Matt, thanks for all the feedback. I would only say that the fact that you did not find our responses and defenses persuasive is one thing. But that episode (and my blog post on it) really were good faith attempts to answer good faith objections.
The Fingerbone of St. Johnny of Cash
Probably just epic trolling. You and your many opponents need each other, you so that you can provide an extended hit list of non sequiturs in the vein of 2 wrongs don’t make a right, but how about 5?
And those of us who pride ourselves on our ability to, I don’t know, keep acting schoolmarmish in the face of all absurdity can wag our culturally appropriate single digits at you.
So I think your Johnny Cash clip was dumb. But kind of on brand. You probably hurt your case with some of us. But not a game changer I don’t think. Anyway, hope you’re as tough as you act.Roger
Roger, there we agree. I hope we are as tough as that also. We are going to need it.
I noticed the comments have been getting heated about the “flipping the bird” to idols. I understand the language/gesture is offensive; on the flip side there’s really no other phrase in the English language that quite captures the level of vehement contempt you were looking for, which is rightly due to all the works of darkness. So I appreciate the sentiment, if not the specifics, which is a point I don’t see discussed enough in the letters.
Sincerely,Anna
Anna, thank you.
RE: The Fingerbone of St. Johnny of Cash
Hello Pastor Doug,
I am a longtime follower of your blog and podcast, and plan to continue being one. I know you have received a lot of blowback about the “finger” scene in the New Saint Andrews promo piece. I was startled to see it myself. I think my reactions were summed up well in the letter you posted from Pastor Matt from Calgary.
While you dissected the ways it can be used divorced from the sexual connotation, I don’t think that part is ever absent, just pushed to the background for a bit. This is a weapon of the enemy that tarnishes the wielder in the process of using it.
More important than the sexual connotations, however, is the common use of it that is more to the point of the video. It means that I have gotten so angry that I am displaying “unbridled rage.” It is past time for thinking and time for me to emote, and you don’t want to see me when I emote bigly! I think Christians are in dangerous territory if they abandon careful thought, and the results of using this expression are apparent in the lives of most people who sprinkle their language with it.
I think the dissonance comes from picking up a baser weapon when their are many other power weapons available that don’t make a Christian look like a non-Christian.Tad
Tad, thank you for the feedback.
Re: NSA Johnny Cash Video
Pastor Wilson,
This letter is about the New St. Andrews Johnny Cash “favorite finger” marketing video.
Specifically, it has to do with “blaspheming” idols (e.g. Acts 19:37), and possibly with “good taste”.
(Please Note: I’ve often expressed my thankfulness and appreciation for you and all your work, and the benefit I’ve received thereby, so I’ll save time and just ditto it all again.)
Sir, I had never heard of or considered the doctrine of “blaspheming idols” until one day here on your website a year(?) or so ago, I heard you parse it out and explain it. As I recall a main point you made was that Paul showed some sort of “due respect” to even these false idols (Diana).
My question is, basically, if Paul showed “due respect” to the false, anti-Christian idol/”goddess” Diana . . . then why is it OK to show such disrespect to these blasphemous idols e.g. of the Olympics? Isn’t it basically the same thing? And if not how are they different?
If it is OK to flip those idols the bird, what about showing someone spitting on one of these idols . . . Or more to the point, why not (tastefully) show someone pissing (KJV) on them, or even more . . . why not (non-obscenely) show someone *defecating* on an idol . . . You get my point.
And just to come at it from another angle, please . . . If it is good and OK to proudly endorse (even for a split second) Johnny Cash flipping a defiant bird at these idols . . . Why wouldn’t it be good and OK to proudly endorse a (non-obscene) picture or video of a person literally *defecating* on these same idols?
Aren’t these two things “exactly” the same thing?
Thank you!
P.S. I haven’t watched the 50 minute Doug Wilson and Friends video you made about this, but if you tell me it goes into great detail in explanation and answers all objections, etc. I will try to make time to watch it. Thanks.Robert
Robert, thanks for the good questions. In Ephesus, Paul’s friends were pagan priests, and knew that he had not been blaspheming their gods. That was a good thing. In 2 Kings 10:27, Jehu, after slaughtering the priests of Baal, turned their place of worship into a latrine. That too was a good thing. So my response would be to swallow your reductio. There could be a time when a godly representation of that kind of contempt was warranted. This is not a one-size-fits-all issue. Where are we in the battle? How grotesque are the idols? What are the qualifications of the men leading the effort? And so on.
Subject I’m addressing—The man in black’s unmentionable phalange and a Court Case against the NY Depart. of Ed.
Hi Doug,
As someone who isn’t, to use your enemies’ moniker, a fanboy, I have a question that I think you are well-able to answer.
Currently, I am involved with a Court Case against the NYS Department of Education (Link below) in regards to their adherence in keeping pornography in the Government School here in my town of Clyde-Savannah. This all started last year when I found out about the books they keep in their Library, and decided I needed to Ephesians 5:11 the whole situation. I went through all the proper channels and bureaucratic contingencies that the well-dressed Leviathan had in place to keep his liar intruder free . . . and the ACLJ took up my Case. With that said, this whole situation touches on something that I myself have been wrestling over for most of my life. Which is this: I really like to fight. In my younger years it manifested in sinful ways (which my own enemies continually bring to the surface), but now that my heart has had its divine reassignment surgery, I can’t really escape that aspect of myself. I still like a good fight. I enjoy the street-preaching born strife and the trebuchets aimed at me, be they verbal or otherwise (One time I had a feminine hygiene product stuck to my Church doors after preaching on Romans 1), and find it all incredibly *fun*. I’ve surrounded myself with people whom I trust, that can, and have, told me to shut up and calm down, and it’s worked. Yes, it still pops up, but for the most part, I’ve settled on the fact that I need to use this aspect of me for God, and no one else.
Now, my question is this; It’s really hard for me, when I don’t have a fight, and I’m not sure how to handle it. This desire for a good fight, I can honestly say, is the most effective haymaker that Ivan Drago could ever throw at me. Its smooth, flies straight and true, and most of the time I can see it slicing the air on its way towards my jaw.
So, how do I handle the time between the Bells?
Those moments when Mickey needs to cut my brow and growl in my ear, are (in God’s perfect providence, I know), sometimes longer than I know what to do with.
It all might be moot, given the slow-moving limbs of Leviathan, but having some guidance would be more appreciated than I can pen a powerful metaphor to express.
Thanks Doug!
Here’s the link:Jacob
Jacob, remind yourself daily that if you are fighting in order to scratch an internal itch of your own, it will result in ineffective and stupid fighting. It disqualifies you from leading others into the fray, because no one wants to follow a brawler. Courage in a general is inspiring, but brashness in a mob leader makes intelligent warriors want to go somewhere else.
Then the piece on women and education. Wilson uses the terms “silly women” or “silly wives” six times. I know Wilson loves calling out logical fallacies, would this be ad hominem? Dishonest argument in any case. By the time my father was in his early 20s he had a wife and two kids and was running his own business. Do you think he was less or more “silly” as a young man than I was, spending years in college and grad school? In the past few generations we’ve had a massive increase in the number of women attending and graduating… Read more »
Calling Doug a liberal is utterly laughable. If anything, he’s a little too conservative in some areas, at least in some of his rhetorical tendencies.
How’s JF Gariepy’s home life?
“Wilson uses the terms “silly women” or “silly wives” six times. I know Wilson loves calling out logical fallacies, would this be ad hominem? “ It would be ad hominem only if the insult were the basis of the argument, not a side commentary. You’re a bad person, therefore you are wrong is ad hominem. You are wrong for reasons X, Y, and Z, oh and this is unrelated but also you are a bad person is not ad hominem. ” It’s ridiculous that Wilson is arguing that college educated women in 2024 are more righteous than women of past generations who… Read more »
Pic related
.
Is bitcoin liquid enough to replace a bank account for savings? Can it always be easily sold, even when the price crashes and non-hodlers are freaking out?
I’m not skeptical, just somewhat ignorant of the practical side of it
When I say replace, I mean for a main savings account, not small accounts in the bank for daily purposes (credit card/ATM) or a small emergency nest egg separate from savings
No. There is no foreseeable way to get Bitcoin out of the realm of speculators, so its price will always be fluctuating up and down by double-digit percentages in a year. In the last five years, it started out at $10000, went up to $60000 early in 2021, down again the same year to $35000 and back up to $65000 a few months later, then tumbled all the way below $20000 in the last few months of 2022, after which it climbed at varying speeds up to $70000 and then started oscillating up to now by 15% each month or… Read more »
So in other words not a bad long-term investment if you have other more stable assets and if you time the sell decently, but too unstable to be a genuine alternate currency
Luigi, is the roulette wheel a long term investment? Bitcoin is pushed as speculative investing. So, if you have bucks that you don’t care if they are lost or if they increase, it may be for you. That being said, all the normal rules for investments really don’t work well anymore. Does anyone consult Standard and Poor’s when looking at bonds? Or consider P/E ratings? Does the SEC really watch companies to see who is cooking the books and return investor money when the books are crooked? I push get out of debt because many of the Christians I have… Read more »
“Big 401k portfolios but they still had huge debt for expendables.”
Depends on the numbers.
If you can borrow at 2% and invest at 12%, you’re a buffoon if you don’t.
Granted, most people borrow at 28% and invest at 2%. So…..
That “Hard Times Ahead” letter from John is astonishingly, actually misogynistic. The man needs to pay more attention to the duties of the Christian in general that he ought to apply to marriage, like, “Outdo one another in showing honor.” I’m all for headship and submission in marriage, proper patriarchal authority, but the man has no idea what it means to be a benevolent head. Your wife’s not a decoration. He doesn’t want a wife, he wants a servant with a nice figure and a baby factory. “I don’t need the woman for anything other than indulgence and child-rearing.” That… Read more »
No, whatever might be the faults of his viewpoint, men like him are not the reason feminism exists in the first place. Western liberal egoism is the reason feminism exists in the first place.
In a sense, yes. In other sense, no. So feminists are responsible for feminism, yes. But it was in reaction to male abdication around the industrial revolution. The home had been shaken up, because now all of a sudden employment and making a living was longer as much of a family endeavor. Men were going out to work in factories and mines, and other such places, and women no longer had their constant presence in the home. This also led to a “bar culture” where men didn’t want to go home and deal with a ton of problems and children,… Read more »
You may be confusing the motives behind feminism with those of the social gospel and progressive movements. The roots of the former predate the two latter, and trace back to Enlightenment thinking, with it’s view of humankind as autonomous, elevation of individual rights over responsibilities, and proposition that chief among those rights is “the pursuit of happiness”. Notice I didn’t specify feminine egoism but rather Western egoism. Naturally when you tell the boys “Here’s something good and you’re entitled to it.” the girls cry “I want some candy too!” What you call abdication involved men finding the best work they… Read more »
I was not calling the move to factory and industrial jobs abdication in and of itself. I’m sure there were plenty of men that still attempted to be good fathers and husbands, and blessed their lines with benevolent headship. However, the industrial revolution opened the gates for mass abdication, for with greater privilege (though I realize that came much later), came great temptation. It was an unfortunate fruit of the industrial revolution that brought about much male abdication for the reasons I listed above. However, the bible gives us a pattern for female rebellion and male abdication. Right at the… Read more »
Sticking with what scripture tells us, Eve took the first bite of the forbidden fruit because she was deceived and because she saw that the fruit was desirable. That, and not something else, is what the Bible tells us. The Bible does not say anything about Adam abdicating and failing to protect Eve from the serpent. That notion is just eisegetical commentary imposing contemporary social bias onto scripture.
I don’t understand how it can be any other interpretation. Yes, Eve was deceived, that much is true, she did take the first bite and IS culpable for her sin. I’m not denying that whatsoever, so please hear me on that. However, the Fall in the Garden is called Adam’s sin for a reason. Adam was her head day one, she was his helper. Genesis 3:6 states that Eve ate the fruit and gave some to her husband “who was with her” and he ate of it as well. If Adam is her head, and he was with her, he… Read more »
Indeed, how can the interpretation be anything but what the text says? The text doesn’t say anything that you said, those are just details that you imagine and supply, or to be fair, have heard and repeat. You’re starting with assumptions that are from outside of the text and imposing them on the text. The “because” is that Eve was deceived and ate because she saw the fruit was good for food, was a delight to the eyes, and was desirable to make one wise. Later scripture will identify these as the lust of the flesh, the lust of the… Read more »
Is it then not Adam’s fault that he allowed his wife to sin? If Adam was with her, he would have witnessed the deception, and then done nothing. Eve was deceived, and while Adam’s fault was listening to his wife in part, should he not have prevented the situation? Or are we to think that Adam was somehow not responsible for failing to step in and stop the whole matter? In verse 12, Adam tries to blame his sin on the woman. “The woman you gave me” is him trying to say, “I was just listening to my wife and… Read more »
With all due respect to Doug, the fact that he was the one who said something matters less than you imply. What we are given to know is that Adam disobeyed God by listening to his wife and doing what God told him not to do and for that he was faulted. Nowhere in the Genesis narrative is it stated that his fault was allowing his wife to sin or that he failed to protect her, or not stepping in or not shutting the serpents mouth. Those are all “he shoulda done” speculations and opinions of Christians commenting on the… Read more »
“kind of” gynocentric complementarian churches
I wouldn’t call it male abdication.It was a total upheaval of a longstanding way of life and,while wages were better, every member of the family was harmed by the move to the giant industrial cities to find work. Moving from a cottage, however humble, in the countryside to an overcrowded slum tenement in the city–where the air was foul, you had no patch of land to cultivate, and you were all living on top of one another–was brutal. There was no benevolent supervision from parson and squire, there weren’t the social events good parsons arranged for their flocks, and, most… Read more »
I think he was trolling, hoping Doug would respond with something that he could twist to make the ministry look bad.
Doug’s response was perfect, and not what John wanted at all.
Looks like you have to wake up pretty early in the morning to put one over on Douglas Wilson.
Struck me as trolling as well. The chauvinism was a tad too over the top.
I don’t know if he was trolling or not, but I must respectfully disagree with John Middleton: Men like him are exactly why we have modern feminism. My mother had a college professor who cheerfully announced at the beginning of each semester that he never gave a woman a higher grade than a C. When I started my first business, I was unable to get a bank loan without my husband co-signing despite the fact that I made more money than he did. I have an aunt who was a college professor who for years was not allowed to eat… Read more »
Look, keep the rib, can we get credit cards back?
Now, let me tell you why not only misogyny doesn’t exist, but was created by Marxist, leftist, no good, dirty, rotten people with different political ideologies than me…
Kathleen, how many men of various descriptions had similar circumstances and just got over it and proceeded to do well in their lives? Lots.
Even in the 80s, women in the military were promoted, given school slots, plush assignments and other move ahead benefits denied to men not because of their outstanding ability but just because they were women.
By the way, who has the football now? I asked that question a few weeks ago and you didn’t answer. Biden? Harris? Someone else?
I’m not sure how you answered any of her arguments and personal experience? How about instead of debunking women’s struggles all the time, we find the real ones and fix them?
Kenneth, we can start by stopping promotions and such in the military just because you are a woman or black or homosexual. That is a real problem that can be fixed easily. During the military reduction in force measures in the mid 90s dumped highly qualified men in favor of barely qualified women. So saying that her Mom got a C because that’s what the professor gave women is no reason to claim that the entire system is rigged against women. The military and many industry giants give great rewards to women who are not even qualified for the jobs… Read more »
Dave, how many of those men of various descriptions were treated badly explicitly because they were men?
The point you’re not getting is that while life is hard for everyone, a person’s race or sex should not be the reason it’s hard. Sure, bad things happen to white men, but rarely because they are white men.
Not sure which football you’re referring to. But you’re increasingly coming across as someone who is just fine with people being treated badly and wish to blame the people trying to fix it.
In today’s industry, many men are treated poorly because they are men and especially poorly when they are WASPs. In the 80s, 90s and 2000s US military, white men were passed over for promotion because they were white and not homosexual. The nuclear football that accompanies the president. That came up when you were discussing Trump versus Biden and who was scarier with the football. We still don’t know who has the football today. Please read what I actually write and don’t add your feelings to the language. As a matter of fact, I do care for the downtrodden. The… Read more »
I would like to see a source for your claim above that there is an airline that hires women and then pays them to stay home. That sounds to me like the kind of malarkey Trump would come up with (along with immigrants eating people’s pets and Democrats supporting post-birth abortion and wanting to take your guns away) And if you think that in the 1980s and 90s, being a homosexual got you a military promotion then I’ve got a bridge to sell you, cheap. As recently as 1992 I represented a young man who was being kicked out of… Read more »
See my response to Kenneth above. I did not specify “modern” feminism, but I expect there is a chain of connection between it and previous forms. What I neglected to point out above is that feminist movements have not been organized and advanced by poor, downtrodden women but rather by fairly well off, privileged women. One particular problem with the feminism of the past sixty years is that its method was to downplay plain differences between women and men in pursuit of absolute equality. The (natural?) progression has been to the current transgender-mania, wherein the lines are so blurred any… Read more »
John, the old school feminists view the trans activists pushing their way into women’s sports and women’s bathrooms as yet another example of people who have penises trying to dictate to women what to do. On that issue you and I are on the same page, as are many feminists. “Lia” Thomas is a fairly appalling human being. But that aside, you are right that feminism was organized by the well to do, but most movements are because the poor are too busy trying not to starve to death to have the time. Unless the poor’s misery level reaches a… Read more »
As someone from the Sceptered Isle across the Pond, I have often thought that Marxism and the Communism it spawned across the globe last century with all its suffering and death actually had its origin in Victorian laissez-faire capitalism.
Kathleen, Not to drive it into the ground but my point in part is, the women who organized feminism didn’t have the problems Kenneth was talking about, and I don’t believe the disadvantages of women whose husbands worked in factories and mines is what motivated feminism. Now at the risk of anathematization hereabouts let me allow that feminists, when they were in a reasonable mood, which they frequently were not, did make some reasonable points. They said some things needed to stop that needed to stop, your list of things probably being longer than mine. That said, consider the possibility… Read more »
I love how you say, it’s just a bunch of rich women who told other women they have it bad, ignoring the constriction of the middle class since the 50s. Gotta love the meeting of the minds here 🧠
Anon, I can see why a spouse might be self conscience and concerned over your sharing too much with other men in the church, not knowing if it might be crossing a line, which is very easy to do. She too has to attend and be with these people and it might make her privacy feel somewhat violated. How much longer do you feel you need to continue with this particular mens accountability group? According to what you have written it would seem to me you are spiritually strong enough to end this group and just get into a regular… Read more »
Agreed. There is accountability (people you know will be responsible for calling you out, may occasionally check in with you, and to whom you can go for confession of sin and support against temptation as needed) and then there is scheduled, formal, group accountability. The former is essential for us all. The latter is an intervention, preferably limited in time, that can be unhelpfully done (oversharing is just one of the risks), counter-productively prolonged (perpetual hamster-wheel of struggle), and can even serve as a “but i am working on it” excuse for not facing the real changes you need to… Read more »
To add a few thoughts, words can be cheap but actions will tell if forgiveness was truly granted. Trust takes time but should not be withheld beyond a reasonable amount of time, as to demoralize the offender that has truly repented. To trust again would be a gift of love that is offered without assurances. Repeat offenses would entail other circumstances but should not be expected, automatically. God does deliver from such sin and many go on to greater spiritual heights than those that never fell into similar sin.
Thanks for answering my question, Pastor Wilson… and with such detailed points to consider. (Also, I hadn’t thought about Jehu, etc.)
Best Regards.
To “H” on Prayer……. If I may….. I would recommend a little book I heard about via Paul Washer and friends: “The Hidden Life of Prayer” by David MacIntyre (1859-1938, he was a colleague of Andrew Bonar, and upon Bonar’s death took Bonar’s place as minister of his parish)……… My prayer life needs much work, and I was blown away after reading this book (booklet) over and over. You can get a free copy from Chapel Library https://www.chapellibrary.org (or read it online) ,,, it is edited somewhat, but keeps the original language. Of course you can get un-edited copies elsewhere.… Read more »
Also recommend all of E.M. Bounds works on prayer. Think they’re all in public domain.
thanks!
Libraries have porn…..
Yo for real? Have you heard of the internet? Lots of PORN on there…
they are able to block social media tho..shouldnt they be filtering sites?
How is that going for the states that implemented it?
J, another biography would be Grace Upon Grace: Nine Decades of Stories by Jim Wilson. Jim is Doug father and it is a very good read.
https://ccmbooks.org/bookstore/grace-upon-grace-nine-decades-of-stories/
Murray is good on Martyn Lloyd Jones as well. J. C. Ryle’s Light From Old Times contains a number of well-written and informative short biographies.
Marcus Loane has a couple of good short biography collections.
“Pay to go to my college and you’ll be like the Virgin Mary.” Its televangelist tier.
In It’s a Wonderful Life, when Annie says that she’s been saving money for a divorce in case she ever gets a husband it’s supposed to be a ridiculous statement but this is how girls and especially parents see education and career. Unbelievers, Christians and home schoolers all act like this but Christians have more tortured rationalizations.
About college: I am a woman currently in college. The best defense you can give your daughter is a firm, scriptural foundation. I made it through community college with my convictions intact thanks to the support of my father. I am currently attending an online Christian college. If something confuses me or sounds unbiblical, I know I can ask my dad. Do not think you have to send your daughter away for school. I made a conscious decision to do my schooling online. I knew that in a strange place, I would be much more likely to bow to peer… Read more »
Countdown until Doug tries desperately to salvage Trumps disastrous debate performance starts now ⏰
You do realize, don’t you, that pastor Wilson isn’t a MAGA “Trump-can-do-no-wrong” sort of person? I’ve heard him call Trump a “walking bundle of inarticulateness.” He supports Trump because his policies are generally much better than Harris’, and the former president’s oratorical ability (or lack thereof) really has nothing to do with it.
John, read Proverbs 31 a few times and compare Solomon’s ideal woman with yours. /// A wife is the glory of her husband, and husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church, aiming to make her spotless (Eph 5.) /// You say what you want your wife to do for you. What do you want to do for her?
In terms of what “as Christ loved the Church” means, we have the example of the gospels but we also have Revelation. So that love may include removing the lamp stand, warring against them with the sword of his mouth, throwing into great tribulation, etc. Jesus is not a simp.
Barnabas, the husband-wife relationship doesn’t, of course, perfectly mirror that of Christ and the Church, because both men and women are on the creaturely side of the Creator/creature divide. (Otherwise, we should conclude that husbands are infallible.) Husbands are told to imitate Christ’s relationship with the Church by loving and leading their wives, not “warring against them”…they simply don’t have that kind of authority.
John, tell me about Bitcoin.