Letters In the Shadow of Antioch

Your dad was friends with Louis Zamperini?? Please tell the story or post to anywhere it’s been written about. Fight On!

CU

Thanks for responding to my last letter. As I noted in the comments, I have always been impressed by your willingness to publish and respond to criticism. I have read your latest couple of works on the” Revoice for Nazis” crowd, and your rejoinders to them, and I have a few concerns.
I don’t think you are taking your own role as a peddler of “revisionist history” seriously enough. The southern slavery pamphlet and many writings on your blog didn’t just make the point that slavery isn’t necessarily a biblical sin. Those writings actually made many false historical claims about the nature of Southern slavery, the nature of the abolitionist movement, and the character of the society of the antebellum South. The modern “dank right” are doing much the same thing with WWII (praising what it evil) in the context of a new media environment.
You are making a pragmatic case for opposing the Jew-haters now. Moscow and CN are achieving success and could be derailed by a bunch of memelords and pastors sharing videos praising Hitler. But my first concern is the damage this is doing to men’s souls. This is a serious pastoral concern, and I’m not sure you are taking the allure of transgression seriously enough. Also, you (and others) should probably drop the “angry young men” angle. Most of the guys I know who are delving into these dark places are decidedly middle-aged now.
You say men who warned you about Wolfe, Torba, and Isker were also warning others about you. I know that is not true in all cases. Many of these men were concerned about some of the trolls that Moscow seemed to be feeding, but they didn’t accuse you and yours of being trolls. Your response to my last letter brought up (incoherently, I thought) the requirements for charges against an elder and evidence needed for defrocking, but these men were bringing you evidence to help make a prudential case about your business and content relationships. No charges against an elder were in view. Wisdom requires a reevaluation of your discernment in that matter, and re-weighting which voices you will attend to in the future.
Thank you, and God bless your ministry.

Demosthenes

One thing I think that should be clarified when people make the statement “Jesus was a Jew,” is that Jesus was not an Ashkenazi Jew.
If the Samaritans were no longer considered the 10 tribes when mixing 50/50 with other groups, then Ashkenazis with even less Bronze Age Levantine DNA are no longer of the Tribe of Judah.
It often seems that when people say “Jesus was a Jew,” what they are really saying is “Jesus was an Ashkenazi so support Zionism” in a dishonest strong arm attempt.
This can be done without hating all Ashkenazis.
That seems to be the middle ground, one can stand against antisemitism, without trying to equate a 1:1 ratio with modern Ashkenazim to justify political actions in the middle east, as sometimes it seems clear people are saying that if you disagree with Zionism you are going against Christ because his DNA was the same, which isn’t true.
Jesus was of the tribe of Judah, but was not an Ashkenazi Jew racially or Talmudic Jew religiously.
If that could be clarified, while also clarifying hating all Ashkenazis racially is also wrong, I think that’s the proper middle ground. Being against blind hatred towards any groups, but also not elevating anyone to some kind of higher status either, as all of the 12 tribes were ethnically wiped out by the 2nd century, if we conclude the Samaritans were from a single generation of mixing.

Harrison

I’ve been off Twitter for many years. But, in the wake of the election results, I logged back in to observe the goings on.
In the midst of enjoying the lefty meltdowns and the righty gloating, I stumbled into the Joel / Thobias bru-ha-ha and now the Antioch statement. I’m quite familiar with what’s been coming out of Moscow for over a decade now. But I’ve only caught whiffs of the Joel / Brian Suave / Eric Conn / Andrew Isker / red-people-with-blue-eyes. The latest Twitter happenings was my first real introduction. It’s been a bit like discovering a new species of animal at the zoo. “Hmm, I’ve heard of this strange animal, but never actually seen one before. I guess I’ll stick around for a while to observe its behavior.” I’d like to make a general observation to gauge your reaction. Let me be clear, I’m not making any claims about the veracity of the claims for or against either Tobias or Joel. This is just some 30,000 foot observations in the wake of the dust-ups.
Let’s rewind the tape to pre-COVID. The Moscow group, of which you are the undoubted leader, is many years into building a sub-culture in the Christian Reformed space. This culture is centered around a physical location, but it reaches nationally through books, podcasts, conferences, and blogs. One distinct (but not only) aspect of the MoscowMood (TM) is the serrated edge and the general fun in employing it. This is mostly directed towards left-leaning “Christian” circles, but every now and then the edge cuts close to the Reformed circle. Objections are raised. One objection, “you are creating a following of online meany-pants” and “stop attacking all these respectable elders and institutions.” To which your reply seems to be “I can’t be responsible for everyone who doesn’t listen to my whole teaching.” COVID happens and much of the Reformed evangelical world is found to actually be a bunch of lefties, and support for the MoscowMood (TM) makes a big leap forward.
Fast forward to the last few years. A sub-sub culture of Reformed evangelicalism forms around some of the aforementioned names and Twitter anons. Growth of this sub-sub culture is rapid. There is no slow burn buildup. The serrated edge is employed. But one area that seems to always have particular interest is (drum roll please), the Jews. Objections from Moscow have been raised, “You’re creating a bunch of online meany-pants racists.” To which the response has been, “I can’t be responsible to who doesn’t listen to my whole teaching” mixed with a lot of “ok boomer.” The Joel / Tobias situation combined with the Antioch letter seems to have solidified the belief that Moscow / Apologia have been exposed as a bunch of closeted lefties.
So in general I see a lot of parallels going on here. Many of the tactics Moscow has employed in the past are being co-opted in really unhealthy ways and fired back at you. It makes me wonder where the serrated edge being used within Reformed circles, on other Reformed brethren was a good idea. It created the groundwork for something corrosive like this to take place. I believe KDY circled around this in his article, and while I’m more on your side than his, I think there’s some merit to this critique. What think ye?

Roger

As a Jewish convert to Orthodox Christianity with a fairly wide set of historical books under my belt, it troubles me to see some hierarchs and channels following the world’s narrative about “anti-Semitism” and all the things that have been done to “combat anti-Semitism.” I’ll tell you directly, as a 100% pure blooded Ashkenazi man, how to fix “anti-Semitism:” Anti-Semitism will end when faithless Jews leave other groups of people alone and stop trying to transform their nations and cultures in ways that invariably harm the populations in question. It is really not that complicated.

Michael

My question revolves around the use of the word based. Do you think this word describes a good thing? I had a conversation with a friend who saw it as a good thing (i.e. describing what is based in common sense, natural revelation, not woke). And while I agree that it means not woke, I have also seen it used online to praise sin, like getting drunk before work, or stealing from a girlfriend who lied. Some people who use it seem to want genuine reformation, others seem just to fall into being the controlled opposition, or just dumb.
Happy NQN

George

Regarding “A Neo-Nazi Godsend,” this crowd’s obsessive talk of “The Post-War Consensus” is deeply ironic, because it is Critical Theory—right-wing Critical Theory, yes, but of the classic Frankfurt flavor nonetheless. Critical Theory analyzes society in terms of power structures and their enforcement via language and group consensus. It is a hermeneutic of suspicion that discards the received views and explains them away as bad-faith enforcement mechanisms of those in power, often with very little sober reference to the real facts on the ground. Whether we do this juke with “the white cishet patriarchy” or “the Jews and Big Eva,” it’s all the same: we declare that those we hate and resent control the entire society, and therefore all that exists must be torn down and replaced with our own grand ideas.
Critical Theory of this stripe makes us reductionistic and stupid, but it’s easy to gather followers this way because when you tell young men that practically all of their problems can be explained by a totalizing narrative and a nefarious hidden enemy, you instantly appeal to their pride in “knowing something” (1 Cor 8:2) and make them trust you as the one telling them the truth. This is why, under every Tweet saying the sky is blue, we now have a dozen anonymous men with laser eyes telling us we must reject the Post-War Consensus and boldly declare the sky to be red, and that we would know this if we just read “The Case for Christian Nationalism” or, worse, turned off our discernment and gave Stone Choir a fair listen.
If I may add, these perpetual malcontents have followed Wolfe in this regard, who has been happy to play the Pied Piper. “It didn’t have to be this way,” he said. Rightly so, and many warned Canon’s men about him from the beginning.
With love,

Josh

I think there was at least one reasonable comment to your “A Neo-Nazi Godsend” post. The comment pointed out how your last comment lacks clarity. I’ve only ever heard the term “Post War Consensus” used by the Ogden guys and Joel Webbon. Maybe I should get out on the internet more. Were you aiming that at them? If so, it seems like a lame way to do it if this is a post ostensibly directed at “anons.”

Joshua

I served as a missionary in Asia. What I found was that, in our city of about 100,000, people assumed that I knew every other white person who lived there. Many also assumed I knew every other American, period. I was assumed to have influence with the President of America, to have access to all the fabulous riches of that land, and to be morally responsible for every movie produced by Hollywood. If an American oil company took some action, that was “America” doing it (since people assumed the U.S. government controlled all American companies, not understanding capitalism).
Ironically, I was more out of touch with the American news during that period of my life than at any other.
Do all these assumptions sound childish and unfair? They are natural human assumptions made by unreflective people. They remind me very much of the assumptions some of your commenters are making about Jews.

Jennifer

First, thank you for your ministry . . . I know that you have been a great guide to my elders over the years. I also have personally come to appreciate your pastoral guidance and your sense of humor.
I am writing about the current controversy that the Reformed world is embroiled in. Yep, the whole antisemitic thing. I think you are in the right on the issues, and I think you have argued your points ably and biblically. I also agree with the Antioch Declaration. However, I want to encourage you to go even further.
My understanding is that Jon Harris of Conversations That Matter has invited you, James White, and Tobias Riemenschneider to some sort of forum. As someone who is on your side in this whole mess, I strongly encourage you to take part in this. I am not sure if it ought to be a formal debate, a moderated discussion, or what, but I am sure that it needs to happen. Short of that, I can only see the fissure deepening. The church needs the leadership of its spiritual fathers right now, and I think going back and forth in tweets, blog posts, and YouTube videos is not the way to do it. My hope and prayer is that all of you men can physically sit down together, look each other in the eye, and talk things out.
And I do stress the physical part—this needs to be in person. Part of my coming to Christ was seeing how utterly deluded and vindictive the secular world became as it used social media. I know you saw, as I have, the way the left cloistered themselves off in digital echo chambers, leading to a dehumanization of anyone might dare to disagree with them. I now see Reformed Christians doing the same, and it breaks my heart.
You no doubt have already considered all this, but I felt the need to reach out. Perhaps you have yet to hear from someone who agrees with you on the issues, yet also strongly believes that you need to engage in this proposed dialogue.
Again, thank you for your ministry, and thank you for reading my letter. I pray that this division among brothers is quickly resolved, and that we can all get back to preaching nothing except Jesus Christ and him crucified.
Sincerely,

Seth

Make sure you saw all the Will Spencer messages, it looks like he was
mocking the Holocaust narrative for months before the Stone Choir stuff,
also with that SovereignBrah guy even over a year ago (it’s why
everyone was surprised when Will changed so dramatically and stopped
talking to them). He was even instructing Woe from Stone Choir on how to attack the Holocaust narrative, this was before their podcast . . . Some
are wondering if Will Spencer was told if he turned on Stone Choir, he
would be offered a book deal in the future, because this makes no sense
considering how openly Will was speaking about the JQ right up to before
“some elders” talked with him after the podcast. I know a lot
of the groyper types are cold-hearted man, that bothers me. But a lot of
what’s in the Stone Choir stuff is unfortunately true and it’s time
good-hearted Christians have open discussions about this stuff (so SC
isn’t their only source) with those of us who don’t hate all of any
group, but believe a cartel has lied to basically everyone, using
low-level Jews as human shields. Don’t throw your entire life’s
work away for all this, Doug. We want the old Doug back. Please find the
middle grown like Joel Webbon has where he talks about this stuff, but
pushed Stone Choir away. That gives young guys who can clearly see
what’s wrong have a path that doesn’t lead to blind racial hatred,
because otherwise SC is where they will end up. But the WW2
narrative is going to fall apart, because it’s simply not true. Those
who attack young men with good hearts realizing this and talking about
it, are pushing decent men away, and it’s making the old guard Reformed
guys look out of touch, and hateful towards right wing men who are
trying to shake awake their fathers out of the Frankfurt school
“denazification” race communism program they were all put under.How
do we separate the cold hearts from the decent Christian hearts talking
about the JQ? We bring the entire discussion out in the open and be
honest about it, like Joel did with that patreon series, otherwise
online chat groups where really dark stuff gets shared ends up the norm.

Will

Thankful for your ministry, it has blessed my life.
I have a question from your book “Reformed not enough”, you stated on pages 34-35 “The Lord then phrased it another way—a man must be born of water and of the Spirit (3:5). And Jesus does not just limit this to individual men—all of Israel must be born again (3:7), which is what happened at Pentecost. The valley of dry bones was transformed, and Israel stood up again, filled with resurrection life.”
What do you mean by “all of Israel must be born again (3:7), which is what happened at Pentecost. The valley of dry bones was transformed, and Israel stood up again, filled with resurrection life.” It’s a peculiar statement, but in a good way. Any clarification would be great and I would love any other resources that can point me to this view point. Thanks Pastor.

Mike

I am a 21-year-old girl, striving to follow the Lord my God. I have listened to a lot of your stuff on Canon+, and so has my dad. We both love and appreciate all the wisdom we can glean from the app. I have a great relationship with my dad, he is definitely my provider and protector. I have read a lot of yours and others stuff on marriage and courtship, such as: Get the Girl, Get the Guy, Courtship for dummies, Biblical Courtship, Praise Her in the Gate, Her hand in Marriage, What He Must Be in Order to Marry my Daughter, Preparing to be His Help Meet, Eve in Exile, and Virtuous. The top 3 of which I listened to with my dad.
Now I know that our culture has been burning in this dumpster fire of feminism for a long time now. And we are realizing how deadly this whole agenda is and we are all in hurt status. But the thing that is hitting me hard at the moment is how much this has hurt the guys. Majority of them have left the church and are perfectly fine with living alone, playing various video games and looking out for number one. Now I don’t want to throw rocks at just them, this was a group effort. It makes sense why they would choose this, instead of the hard road to glory if you have never tasted glory, or the God it comes from.
There have been suitors come and go, some of which I liked, but eventually after testing, they failed. All of the suitors in the end my dad was saying we could do better.
I have had a lot of fantastic talks with my dad, on marriage and courtship. Both of us have a very similar view on who I want to marry, and he is honest with me on ways I could grow in the Lord. But all in all I think he would say he is pretty pleased with me. But we both understand if we have such standards for a man, I need to fulfill the other side of that by being a respectful and submissive wife.
My dad would prefer I not marry anyone 6 years older than me. The reason for this is the potential of him not being a virgin, why is he just now pursuing marriage, I would most likely be a widow sooner, and the fact that he has lost a lot of daylight. But the main thing is, why is an older guy going after the younger girl? Why not go after girls your own age?
But at the same time, if a guy were blinded by this world and by God’s grace come back to the Lord. Should we see him as redeemed and look past any past mistakes he may have had, if he has proven himself to be truly changed by God? The main reason I ask is that it feels like a lot of these guys are just now waking up! A whole decade later, now wanting to do the right thing?
My question for you is, do you agree with this concern? Do you think I’m being too uptight and missing out on an amazing opportunity? Are there any resources you would recommend to me to have a better grasp? I just don’t want to wake up one day, 30-years-old, and realize how much time has been wasted.
Thank you for your time.

Abigail

Theologically, what should we think about nativity scenes? Graven image?

Colten

Your recent podcast on Femininity in Women’s Sports is along the lines of something I’ve done some thinking about, but there is a wrinkle that I haven’t fully worked out that I’m curious on your take for, which is women learning self defense. It seems that learning self defense will always involve some amount of sparring . . . which I agree shouldn’t be turned into a spectator sport, but I don’t think should be disallowed, as it would hamper what I see as a legitimate need in training. And sure, in an ideal world women wouldn’t need to learn self defense, but . . .
What is your take on this crux point of intersecting concerns?

Ian

Hi Pastor Wilson, this is not regarding any particular post, but a question about child rearing and covenant faithfulness. First of all, I just wanted to thank you and everyone who helps put on NQN each year, and for all the free resources. I have been a big fan since I discovered you and Canon Press in 2021. Your writing, especially on marriage and family, has transformed our family life.
A good friend recently questioned me on your views related to children’s salvation. He said he saw a clip of you online making the case that if parents are covenantally faithful in raising their children, then the salvation of their children is guaranteed. (I didn’t see the clip and he wasn’t able to find it again.) His view was that this is like being a name-it-and-claim-it Charismatic, that if one of our children ends up not saved, then we weren’t faithful enough. I have not heard you explain salvation of children quite like this before. Can you help me understand your position? My wife and I are bringing our children up in the covenant, and we practice daily family worship, catechism, Scripture memorization, Sabbath feasts, etc. We believe in treating our children as Christians rather than leaning into doubt. They all appear to love Christ and follow Him. But I guess I assumed that nothing in life is guaranteed, and that there’s always the chance one of them could reject the faith. Can you clarify and/or point me in the direction of some reading material?
Thank you,

Steve

What a gift you are to the body. Our family has learned so much from your teaching of God’s Word. Thank you.
As I continue to read the Bible I have come across some study tools that are very helpful like the Blue Letter Bible app and Jewish ways of studying Scripture, like reading the Scriptures thematically using the Holy Spirit paragraph divisions known as Stumahs and P’tuchahs which are many times different then the paragraph layout of our modern Bibles. The Jews have a rule when studying Scriptures called the law of first mention. So for instance the moon was given for light and for signs and seasons. The word for seasons is moed, which actually means ‘appointed times’. And all the 7 feasts of the Lord are ‘appointed times’, or also known as ‘dress rehearsals.’ So little did the Hebrew’s know that for hundreds of years before Messiah came that they were celebrating Him. Yeshua our Messiah did something or is going to do something very significant on the anointed times. For instance he died on Passover, was in the grave as the sinless bread during the Feast of Unleavened Bread, rose on First Fruits , and sent us his Spirit on Pentecost. All the Spring feasts have been fulfilled. The Fall feasts have not yet been fulfilled. The Feast of Trumpets represents the trumpet being blown in the last days, the Day of Atonement represents the day of judgment before YHVH and he sees Christ’s’ blood on us or not, and lastly the feast of Tabernacles (feasts do have multiple fulfillments, but it is very likely our Messiah was born during this feast when he Tabernacled amongst us and was born in a sukkot). But this feast represents the wedding supper with the Lamb and the 8th day. So since these feasts are shadows of Christ and help us tell our children about YHVH’s great redemptive plan each year, and help us adore our Messiah, why are we not celebrating these as a body of Christ? These are not ‘Jewish Feasts’ these are The Lord’s feasts. The New Testament Scriptures tell us to keep the feast, our Messiah kept these feasts, we are to walk as he walked. They are better then any of our other ‘holy days’. These along with the Lord’s Supper, what treasures.

Sarah

I’m a bit surprised by that Springtime for Hitler video. That seems like an awful lot of skin to see on a video on your blog. Nuisance lust and all I think I get, but did you really mean to post that?

Jake

I was talking with a liberal family member about gender roles in marriage. When I mentioned my responsibility to lead my family, he said that it was different in his marriage because of his wife’s superior leadership abilities relative to his. We at least agreed that if there was a scenario where neither of them were leading, he would be responsible for captaining the ship.
If you can grant that he’s right in his description, that his wife has true and good leadership ability and he does not, how would you explain that the roles are rooted in their nature? Is it an acceptable exception to the general rule?

AH

Re: Application, Allergies & Anaphylaxis
Ah, Pastor Wilson, you have named what I have seen as one of the critical weaknesses of the modern Reformed church—make that the majority of Christendom. The almost universal allergy of our church leaders to the practical application of the Gospel is driving our young people away, emasculating those who stay and shouting irrelevance to those unbelievers who might venture in to see what this Christianity is about. God’s people are starved by the ignorance and/or cowardice of their leaders in considering how it is that repentance, following Jesus and filling themselves with God’s word will make any difference in their lives. When the masses question the relevance of the Gospel they are not asking for skinny jeans and rock ’n roll, they are asking for application. That hunger is also why the few pastors who do offer spiritual applicability to our daily lives have such large followings—think Wilson, Piper, Driscoll, DeYoung and the quasi-secular preacher, Jordan Peterson.
The Spirit blows where it will, but God uses means and I think the path to revival and reformation of Church and culture lies primarily in this issue. Yes, of course if the people start making practical application of the Gospel to their lives, we will quickly encounter application problems. If ideas related to marriage, child-rearing, education, money, sex, vocation, vacation, Sabbath, and for sure, politics, are applied without understanding, by blockheads in black-and-white mode, there will be bumps. But there are bumps regardless. We are experiencing all the bumps Doug has outlined in his “Little List” and many more. It is however far better to work a ship that is moving in some direction than one abandoned by the crew and foundering on the rocks. Minimizing the bumps is why we need leaders with both courage and understanding. It is why we need leaders whose theology directs their political/cultural agenda and not the reverse.
Where to start? The sermon. If the congregants can’t name some application of the Gospel in the last sermon, and they rarely can, then the preacher has failed in his preaching. Either the application was not there in the first place or it get lost in interminable rabbit trails. If the preaching continues to fail, then they need to find someone in their congregation who can preach a coherent, linear and applicable, 15-30 minute lesson. Those people are out there, but seldom in the pulpit. If the pastor does not have talent in regards to teaching, it is not a tragedy or deal breaker. There is always more work than can be done in even small congregations. Let that pastor identify and organize talented speakers and lead in ways other than the weekly pulpit. (If the preacher is unusually good, then they can add another 10, but as you, Doug, have mentioned, a sermon should “feel like it is 20 minutes.”) These are hard and potentially disruptive words, but though the times are desperate, these concepts can be initiated over time.
Next? The exhortation. A quick, mini-sermon at the opening of the worship service is a golden opportunity to teach practical wisdom, and it is much easier to speak well for four minutes than thirty. This is another moment to pull in elders or other adept congregants to speak. Remember 1 Timothy 3:2—“able to teach.”
Next? Encourage and equip parents in the use of a daily family meal, reading on the sofa and tucking in as particularly opportune times to bring Gospel application to their children in ways that their young minds can hear.
Next? Small groups and/or Sunday school classes. Get wise elders or other natural leaders out there figuring out where the need is in their congregation and teach to it. “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.”
“. . . Every good work,” that’s a big claim, but with wisdom and effort, the truth of that assertion can turn lives, families, churches and communities around. It has been done before, not perfectly, but far better than we have experienced in the crumblings of church and culture we have witnessed in the last seventy years.
Peace & grace,

DC

Is it wrong to lie to someone about their surprise birthday party so that you can keep it a surprise?
Thanks!

Caleb

I recently listened to the Doug and Friends episode entitled “Winning, winning, winning” and a comment was made that providentially was made during the youth Sunday School class I taught a few days before. The guest said something along the lines of, “we need to be working towards making common sense common again.” This is a comment that I have heard a lot in conservative media, even among politicians here in Canada where I reside. However, this topic came up in Sunday School under the context of teaching the youth how to answer what seems to be one of your favourite (I hope you can read my Canadian spelling) questions: By what standard? Not long ago there was a push in the public High School to include litter boxes for a certain kind of student in the washrooms. Praise be to God, that other parents quickly shot down that proposition. However, I asked the youth, “What says that is wrong if people want it?” Their response was, “common sense.” So then I posed them the question, “Well, abortion in our country is commonly deemed acceptable by the majority of people. Does that mean that common sense would say that abortion is right?” The silence in the room answered that question and I was able to communicate that the word of God is the only true standard that can be stood on firmly.
My question then for you is whether a push towards “common sense” is even valuable for us as Christians. Does “common sense” not come from a concept of democracy where whatever the common “demos” or “people” believe is the common sense? Sure, in previous centuries when people believed the Bible, common sense was true sense based on God’s word. God was over the demos. However, it seems unhelpful in an anti-Christian culture to appeal to common sense, when the common sense ignores God, approving of abortion, self-mutilation, and divergent sexual practices, to name only a few. Thoughts?

David

I love this time of year. Football season is in full swing. College basketball is starting up. The holiday season is approaching. And . . . No Quarter November equips us with the necessary resources and content to help us set the idols of our culture ablaze! Incredibly thankful for your ministry Doug and friends!
I am finishing up my MDiv education this December, and the Lord has used y’all to help shape and challenge me during my time in seminary. However, throughout my time of growth I have found myself ostracized with peers and even with my church body. I went through a pastoral internship with my church last year and during my time as an intern word got out that I appreciate Doug Wilson and his content/resources . . . which unfortunately caused some problems. Ultimately, at the end of the internship each intern had an exit meeting with the pastors. During my exit meeting I was praised with a long list of attributes and characteristics that I had exemplified during my time as an intern. However, this list of honorable character quickly became overshadowed by my personal appreciation for Doug Wilson and friends. My pastor told me that he would be uncomfortable to recommend me for a future ministry position, not because of a character issue or a lack of giftedness. Not at all. His uneasiness came because of my personal appreciation for Doug Wilson.
Since then, I have pursued the pastors in conversation. I have met with a pastor multiple times trying to explain my theological convictions and in what ways my theological convictions have been shaped through the teaching of Wilson and friends. These conversations have been difficult, but the Lord is faithful and has been doing a great work in me during this season.
I guess the main purpose of me writing this letter to you is to express my gratitude and ask for any helpful advice for this time.
Grace and Peace brother!

Alec

When a preacher’s son is a REAL hellion, you can’t swivel in your seat to look at him because he’s sleeping off a wild Saturday night on the town at his girlfriend’s place, or worse, with some girl he doesn’t know at all. Hellions don’t go to church. If the preacher’s son is sitting with Mom through Dad’s sermon, he’s a cutup, not a hellion, and will probably turn out just fine in the end. I did, I think. Still walking with the Lord forty years later. And I greatly enjoy your work, Doug, notwithstanding the nitpicking.

Peter

There seem to be three equally unappealing and challenging ways to reconcile 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 / 1 Thessalonians 5 with 2 Thessalonians 2. How would you reconcile these views? (called “Early thief,” “Late thief,” and “Smooth but heretical”).
View 1: “Early thief”
Passages in Scripture which refer to the day of the Lord and a thief in the night are referring to events in the 1st-century A.D., including Jesus’ warnings in Matthew 24, 2 Thessalonians, etc. This comports with wisdom from Wright, Chilton, Gentry, DeMar, etc. The issue with this view is that it requires a violent transition from 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 to 1 Thessalonians 5. Does Paul really expect his audience to know that in one moment he’s talking about Christ’s final return and then a sentence later to randomly change to describing 1st century events? Or is there a reasonable way of reconciling this?
View 2: “Late thief”
Passages in Scripture about the day of the Lord and a thief in the night are referring only to the Final Coming. The charm of this view is that it requires no violence to the foregoing passages. The major issue with this view is that it seems to requires that Paul’s talk of the man of lawlessness and the “day of the Lord” in 2 Thessalonians 2 is referring to something thousands of years later, which makes no sense at all. Preterism seems to reign supreme in 2 Thessalonians 2, damaging the “Late thief” view.
View 3: “Smooth but heretical”
Paul (and Jesus?) unfortunately thought the Final Coming would come during or shortly after the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. This view has a smooth, refreshing consistency and seems to make sense of nearly all “day of the Lord” talk. But it would soon crush the doctrine of inerrancy and open up the door to all sorts of bad theology about what Paul got wrong. But hey, Lewis believed something similar…
Much thanks,

Luke

Pastor Doug, your sermons on the Psalms deserve wider circulation. Psalm 107 about drove me off the road while listening to it during a troubling time. It really righted me back up. I’m working on my fourth or fifth listen through right now. Psalm 99 is also full of power. Between the cherubim.
With gratitude for all the camouflaged blessings,

John