Letters From Go-Getters

Apropos of “The Mess that is Candace”:
Do you want to know how I came to follow your blog?
It was your haters.
I had signed up for a FB group called “Based Lutheran Fellowship” (before it degenerated into anti-Reformed sniping). They ran several posts that attacked you by name. “Who’s this Doug Wilson guy,” I thought. “I should look him up.” And then, “Wow, this Doug Wilson makes a lot of sense! I should sign up for Canon Press,” etc.
The point of this is not to disagree with you about Candace; I do not disagree. It’s not even to tell you that I don’t read your blog to read about Candace, though this is true.
It’s to tell you that this post earned Candace a net increase in followers. I know this for a certainty, not by access to any metrics, but because that’s how the system works.
You don’t have to believe in “no enemies to the right” to understand that the best way of dealing with Candace is to ignore her.

Allan

Grading my 8-year-old son’s homework this afternoon, he had to write about his favorite missionary. He put you down and wanted to know your favorite Bible verse. I say you count, ha!
Thank you for your ministry, you have been a blessing to me and my wife and now my son!

Thomas

I’ve read a lot of your books and articles and I’m very thankful for someone who can articulate and reinforce my beliefs. Recently some controversy has come up in my extended family around whether or not men should swim with shirts on, or if it’s even okay for men to be shirtless. I would greatly appreciate your thoughts and input.
Thanks,

Ian

I own a business and am sole proprietor. It’s a little sloppy sometimes on how much I make per month, sometimes it’s quite a bit, other times it’s a little bit; it’s sort of seasonal, but I have a general idea of what I make for the whole year, just not exactly month-to-month. From the profits of the business I pay myself essentially monthly what covers my family’s budget / monthly expenses, and then I tithe to my church on that amount. I roll anything left over back into the business or investments, with the idea that whenever I sell that investment, it’s all profit and I will then tithe from that amount. I know you mentioned a few months back when someone wrote in asking about selling their business, if they should tithe from the profit to their local church and you said some, but to give more broadly in different directions. My question is more so in regards to those other directions and what is permissible? Should it be to a Christian ministry or program, or would it still “count” as a tithe if I were to say give it to someone I know who is a pastor (not at my church) towards a down payment on a house? I’ve always appreciated stories of missionaries or ministers who were gifted things like that, in your father’s biography he was gifted a house if I’m remember correctly? And while I can’t quite buy someone a house with this amount I have from an investment I’ve sold, it would be a pretty good amount towards a down payment. I appreciate your thoughts! God bless.

Christian

For reference: link here.
Warm greetings!
The topic of divorce and remarriage has been a nagging topic to me for quite some time, but has recently resurfaced as a subject of concern to me personally (friends and family members are now entering such situations) and am facing unexpected threats of argument with those closest to me. As a matter of due diligence, I am brushing up on the topic and am reading material on both sides of the aisle. Naturally, since my husband and I respect your objectivity, we wanted to look at your explanation in defense of divorce and remarriage (of course, with all the “proper” qualifications). However, my search has been coming up short. Above I linked your post where you promised a more in-depth interaction with John Piper’s views on remarriage, and either that forthcoming position paper has been lost to the internet void, or you never followed through on your promise for public discourse. I doubt it was the latter, so I am writing to let you know that that information is inaccessible to the public and ask if you could point me in the right direction. Or, if you hadn’t yet published a detailed defense on the topic, if you would consider doing so now?
With all that being said . . . here is where I am standing currently; in the throes of fanatical ideology. I have been persuaded since a young teenager that divorce is only something to entertain in the most dire and unavoidable of circumstances, as some situations unfortunately are, and to consider it with solemn understanding that to be remarried while your spouse is still alive is to commit adultery. Passages that “prove” otherwise actually are vague on the topic and I believe lean more in direction of saying that the spouse would be free to divorce as a means of mercy to that person so that they do not have to be treated in a terrible way on a daily basis. There are no clear passages that give express permission to be remarried, except in the case that the prior marriage had been dissolved. Which, I believe, I can biblically defend means the death of the prior spouse, not just simply dissolving it by means of divorce, since there are passages that clearly say that to be divorced and remarried would be to commit adultery. The conclusion then would be to understand that the act of divorce itself does not properly dissolve those marriage vows in the eyes of the Lord. I know that some argue that as long as the one spouse had already broken the marriage vows (i.e. adultery, abandonment) that the other spouse is then “free to go” which then many conclude that includes “free to remarry,” but I see that as an extra-biblical interpretation, with no proper precedent to justify this position. It’s vague at best, and takes liberty with those passages despite the other more strict definitions about marriage vows remaining in effect as long as the prior spouse lives (Luke 16:18).
The other main argument I’ve heard is the “it’s better to marry than to burn” approach, so many pastors will make this argument for why they believe the divorced person should get remarried, since they were not called to a life of singleness. However, the same pastors will usually do a preliminary inquiry to make sure that the person in question had obtained a divorce in a “biblically lawful” manner. If not, then they are told that it would not be appropriate to remarry. That the grace of God would sustain them during this trial. Why this double standard? Why is it that the grace of God is sufficient for some in a certain trial of singleness, but not in other’s?
So then that brings me to the “fanatical” aspect of things—I’m currently seeing pastors and elders taking liberties where I do not see the Bible permits, and it is essentially church approved and assisted adultery. This has become a genuine struggle and heartbreak of mine to view it all in this way.
Would love to see your in-depth thoughts on the matter.
Thank you!

Hannah

Is there such a thing as a “permanent state of adultery”? For example, say a man divorced his wife for unbiblical reasons and remarried when he ought not to have done. Is he in an ongoing and unforgivable state of adultery as long as he remains married to his second wife? And is he biblically required to go through a second divorce since he wasn’t allowed to get remarried in the first place?

DJ

I have been talking with my fellow church members and we have had a point of contention with the local church’s responsibility to “teach men to act like men.” The issue stems from perceived weak male leadership in the youth program (youth pastor with wife and children still acting immaturely either intentionally or not), men showing up to church with their family wearing Marvel themed t-shirts, observed behaviors of men not holding doors open for others and men not offering their seat when a woman is present in the lobby. We are debating on how the church leadership should handle this: do they actively address these topics from the pulpit, do the leaders engage at the individual level to discuss or is it up to the men of the church to smack these guys upside the head and tell them to get some manners and grow up? I am always grateful and thankful for your insights, thank you.

Travis

Re: Mary Magdalene and Judas the Troubled
Fascinating, I will have to return to the Gospels, read them through again and see what I think about that. . .
Who do you think Thomas’ twin was? One of the other disciples or someone not mentioned in the Gospels?

Roger

All I have to say, completely concurring with your disclaimers (we can’t ultimately know for sure, but thinking about these possibilities is a productive exercise), is: Way to pay attention to the details in the text. Folks—pay attention. You want to have this level of attention and grasp of details in the Word when you grow up. I know I sure do.
That said, consider this. The text clearly identifies at least one aspect of what is motivating Judas: “Then Satan entered into Judas called Iscariot, who was of the number of the twelve” (Luke 22:3). I did not see that in your analysis, but this fact is not inconsistent with your construction. And what does the devil do but lie and create delusions?
Incidentally, one of the scariest verses in the Bible, in my opinion. If you are not in Christ, watch the heck out and do not mess around with the roaming lion.

J P

First of all thank you for writing “What I Learned In Narnia”. It’s a truly amazing book about the stories I have loved for most of my life.
I write to bring to your attention one small error in Chapter 3 Nobility. You attribute a quote of your book to Peter when it was Edmund who was speaking in The Horse and His Boy. (Find it on page 70 in your book and around page 75 in Lewis’ depending on the edition of course.)
I hope this is a helpful mention and a quick fix rather than a waste of your very limited time.

AK

So grateful for you. What have been the best books/resources you’ve read on building a biblically faithful session of elders/deacons? Also, when interviewing a potential candidate into membership at a CREC church, I know the bar is low (A Christian profession, a holy lifestyle), but what do you do when the interested family loves the church, but is theologically completely on the other side of the spectrum (charismatic, Arminian, etc.)? Thanks and blessings.

Ben

Post-Mil question: In Matthew 24:21 Jesus says, “For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will again.” I take it you would agree this statement is anchored to v. 15–16 and the abomination of desolation. Do you identify that event with A.D. 70? I’m struggling to see how the sacking of a single city in 70 A.D. is an unparalleled event to the degree that the global flood or the Holocaust can’t be seen as it’s contemporary. Is the language meant to be taken as genuinely absolute, or do you see a principled reason it should be interpreted differently?

Tyler

I’ve been looking at the CREC and wondering about church planting. There are many questions I have about it, being a Baptist who is convinced of a robust Congregational church governance (the type where churches are associated with and hold each other accountable but don’t have the right to dismiss elders or take property. The way the SBC associations SHOULD work). But my primary questions are, 1. Are there resources you know of that would explain the practical governmental differences between CREC Presbyterianism and historic Congregationalism. I.e. what can the Denomination actually “do” at the local church level? and 2. Does the CREC still have credo-baptists churches functioning happily, or has the CREC become less fertile soil for them over time to the point of them needing to leave?
I want to commend you all on the heat map tool for Canon content. I don’t think church planting in the CREC would have ever even crossed my mind if I hadn’t seen how red the blocks were in my area.

JM

This is a question regarding the spanking debate (podcast) you had with Alex Clark.
First, thank you very much for your ministry. In the last maybe five years I have greatly enjoyed and been blessed by a lot of books, articles and other stuff you have produced.
I am a father to 3 children, between 3 and 7 years old. From an early age my wife and I wanted to discipline our children biblically, despite it being illegal in our European country and being mostly discouraged in churches here. Unfortunately it has mostly been the case that, when I have set a certain standard and enforced it a certain way, my wife didn’t take the same approach, but would often let things go until she is angry and shouts at the kids. She doesn’t want it this way and says she wants to follow my lead on this, but unfortunately the discipline has been very unstable for our kids.
I still try to be consistent in my discipline of the kids. The biggest problem for me right now is how to discipline them when they’re older. It doesn’t seem right for me to spank my seven-year-old boy, but I find it hard to give appropriate and meaningful consequences. I tried things like not being allowed to participate in nice activities or having to eat only bread for diner. But I’m not confident in any of these. Could you advise in good way to correct older children, where the correction in younger years has not been consistent and so there is still a high amount of disobedience?
Thank you so much for all your work.

Nils

Would you provide some perspective on the Biblical definition of a sojourner? Deuteronomy is filled with instructions concerning them (as are other books of the law). There’s been so much pressure on Christians, worldwide, to equate what’s happened with immigration to these texts. I can’t recall ever hearing a clear teaching on it. I think I know what it means. From your perspective and education, what was a sojourner in the time the law was written and what would be an equivalent today (if there is one)?
If you have already answered this, please have someone point me to the correct blog or previous letter-to-the-editor (etc.). I did a cursory look before writing this, but I didn’t not find anything.

Brian

My husband believes our marriage, though ordained by God, was a mistake—and he reminds me of this daily either directly or through silence, frustration, anger, and threats. My life revolves entirely around him and his moods; any desire, wish, or opinion of my own is deemed wrong simply because it differs from his. He has told me plainly: he doesn’t care what I think at all.
We once sought help from a Presbyterian pastor who advised him to stop making such comments, but my husband dismissed him as “a loser.” He frequently quotes Genesis 50:20—“you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good”—arguing that we were both foolish, and if either of us had known then what we know now, we would never have married. He wasn’t always this way. He was once genuinely kind and caring about me, my thoughts, and my personality. Perhaps the obsessive instability was there and I simply didn’t see it; I was unstable myself back then. We were young and foolish and made poor choices, but I believe God has turned it for good, even when it doesn’t feel that way.
My husband insists that if our son doesn’t marry someone he personally selects—someone who only makes apple pies and takes direction on command —he will have failed as a father. He follows Joel Webbon, Dale Partridge, and their circle almost religiously—men I believe have strayed far from the truth. Daily I hear that women can do nothing beyond cooking and childcare, and even that requires a man’s micromanagement. Dale Partridge recently made disparaging comments about his own interracial marriage, calling it “not ideal,” and my husband has echoed similar sentiments about our marriage to others without hesitation.
Living under his dictatorship makes me wish for the end of my life every day, yet I fight these thoughts, knowing God in His vast mercy has saved me. My husband has told me I can leave if I want, but he will take our son and hide him where I cannot find him until he’s 18. Honestly, I am in this marriage largely out of fear—fear of disobeying God by leaving, and fear of what happens to sons raised by single mothers.
I know God ordains everything, so this marriage cannot truly be a mistake—can it? Yet I struggle: Is God a cosmic killjoy? I know He isn’t, but how do I rest my heart in that truth? What do I do? How do I find hope to press on each day when my husband has vowed to make my life miserable?​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

AA

Re: The “Reformed Hebraists” section of “Mud Flaps, Talmud Flaps, and Flaps About the Talmud” (January 12)
Why do you recklessly wade into subjects about which you know little? You laud Johannes Reuchlin, a notorious champion of the Kabbalah (what you misleadingly term, “Hebrew studies”). To advance that demonism he claimed it testified of Jesus. He was backed by the equivalent of the woke theologians of the day, forerunners of the Rosicrucian movement. Reuchlin was confuted by Johannes Pfefferkorn, a learned and indeed heroic Jewish convert to Catholicism who was hounded by Reuchlin’s allies in the episcopal hierarchy.
Reuchlin’s Kabbalah movement, built upon the Medici-backed “Catholic”-Kabbalah pioneer Pico della Mirandola, had covert support from several popes, as I document in “The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome,” among them Medici pontiff Leo X.
There was a conservative Catholic battle with the papally-protected Reuchlin and the powerful movement of Neoplatonic-Hermetic-Kabbalism which has been influential inside the Church since the founding in mid-fifteenth century Florence, of the Platonic Academy. As recently as the Second Vatican Council, whose eminence grisé was Henri de Lubac, Pico’s defender and apologist, Kabbalism has had firm purchase in Rome.
With regard to your sweeping generalization about Talmud-burning, you appear to be unaware that Leo X lent his support to the publication in Venice by the Catholic printer Bomberg of the finest edition of the Talmud ever committed to paper.
It is unfortunate that the received opinion you have imbibed is blithely disseminated to your flock. Your apparent resort to a lackadaisical, Wikipedia-type ecclesiastical chronicle which swallows the myths of Establishment historiography is disservice to your readers.

Michael