Contents
A Theology of Hard Providence
God isn’t a cosmic sadist who loves to withhold blessing from His children. Fair. However—how do we speak about what looks very much like a pattern of intolerable cruelty apart from the illumination of faith? For some of His children, their life stories appear to be one hard providence after another, relentlessly, without relief. The major themes of their earthly lives are failure, frustration, and disappointment. Their earthly lives are the accumulation of losses and wounds that do not heal in this life. To be blunt, considered without the promise of the resurrection, their earthly lives are so shot through with misery that it would have been better if they’d never been born. One thing that sickens me is the tendency of pastors to tell white lies about God, to let Him off the hook for the earthly misery of His children’s lives. So—how do we talk about this candidly, like men, not telling white lies about what God allows to happen to His children?Daniel
Daniel, there’s no denying the reality of what you are saying. Some people experience extremely hard providences, and others do not. But it is not a white lie to say that God has a higher and better purpose for it all, which will be revealed in due time. There is either a point to all of it, or all the suffering is pointless. And ultimately, if it is pointless, there is nothing wrong with it. So God will either land the story or He will not. If He does not, then there is no God. And if there is no God, then there is nothing wrong with the suffering. It just is.
Creeping Feminism
You’ve commented multiple times something along the lines of “we have all been affected by feminism probably more than we even realize.” If you had to pin point an area of practical wisdom (in marriage) in rooting out the down stream damage of feminism what would you say? Please specify for both the men and the women. Thanks for all you do!Josh
Josh, one prime example would be the practice of the husband apologizing to his wife in order to make peace between them after a disagreement. If the husband has wronged the wife, there is of course no problem with him putting it right and making peace. But when a husband apologizes, not because he has done anything wrong, but rather because the wife had her feelings hurt for no good reason, this is an example of him trying to build a good marriage on the foundation of lies. And the wife’s part in this charade would be expecting him to do this. An extreme example would be a husband apologizing to his wife for something he did or failed to do in one of her dreams.
Bathtub Admirals
A few scattered thoughts . . .
If AI proves, in the end, to have no other lasting value, at the very least it is able to give you exactly the illustration you need, no matter how odd.
PJ Media’s comparison of Candace Owens and Graham Platner was spot on. Both were “chosen” by their respective sides on the basis of superficial features that they believed would make them credentialed instead of who they really were. Or, in the words of the late but not so great MLK, they were not judged on the content of their character.
I agree that we’re at a potentially significant point where a cultural win here and there is not nearly enough to justify sitting on our laurels. PURSUE until every last idol has fallen.
You might like taking a gander at a Christian blogger whose site is entitled “Coffee & Covid.” He is a lawyer to spends all his free time analyzing cultural trends from 30K feet, and in the last six months of me reading his comments, he has been surprisingly spot on. No conspiracy-mongering . . . just reading the cultural/political room. As it turns out, having two eyes and a functioning brain can be quite the advantage these days.Andy
Andy, thanks for the recommendation.
A Full Life
This is not a critique. I am only asking a question based on something I have heard you say before but I can’t find where. If this is not the proper place for this I apologize.
In either a video or a book of yours I heard you say something to the effect of “If you want to live a full life you need to be disciplined.” Are you able to expand on the meaning behind “a full life” here? I didn’t want to assume what you meant but maybe that you meant allowing yourself to do all the things Jesus has given you liberty in without letting the rule you or something to that effect. I found the statement compelling and would appreciate if you could direct me to a resource or past post that addresses this.
Thanks for your ministry it has been a blessing to my family and I.Kyle
Kyle, I don’t remember where or why I said that, but I think I can answer your question. There are many aspects of what we would call the “good life,” or a full life, that are quite simply out of reach unless a person is disciplined in his pursuit of them.
All This Attention I’m Getting
This Scripture (which I have paraphrased with ( ) was in my Bible reading this morning. I couldn’t help it after having read all the news stories about your CNN interview. This is Acts 17:6-7—with apologies to Jason and Paul. “. . . they dragged (Douglas) and some brethren to the rulers of the city, crying out, “These who have turned the world upside down have come here too. (Douglas) . . . [is] acting contrary to the decrees of (the Democrat party), saying there is another king—Jesus.”
Anyway, congratulations on your growing fame and I pray it doesn’t go to your head.C&U
C&U, one thing that helps keep me grounded is that the fame is balanced out with all the vilification.
Enjoyed the NPR interview. It was one of the more reasonable interviews I’ve seen in a while. With all the interviews you’ve been doing lately, I’m curious what interactions look like before and after the interview.
How do you determine which interviews you say yes or no to?
Is there any stipulations that the hosts or you put on an interview?
Is there much conversation before or after the cameras are rolling? Has anyone ever pulled you aside and said “you know I don’t think you’re crazy, but I’d be fired for saying that.” Or alternately, “I think you’re a disgusting piece of trash.”
For the ones who come to Moscow, do they stay for church or other functions where they get a chance to meet Christ Church people? Or stay for dinner at the Wilson house?
Carry on.RR
RR, some of those who come to Moscow come to church, yes. And they have been shown hospitality as well. None have been nasty off camera, but some have been blinkered in the story that eventually comes out. Our two basic ground rules are 1. no cameras in the worship service and, 2. when it is what we would consider adversarial press, we record the interview separately as hit piece insurance. When requests for an interview are made, we have someone look at their reach, their previous stories, etc.
Preaching a Funeral
Over the last decade I have served in numerous capacities at a Presbyterian Church. I’ve preached, taught Sunday School classes, youth pastor, etc. but never have I been asked to preach at a funeral until today. I was wondering if there is anything in particular, or a few tips that you think would be important to keep in my mind when preparing the sermon, as well as leading the service. Oh, and one note of importance, the funeral is for my good friend’s father, but I know very little about him because he has kept to himself for the most part and wanted nothing to do with the Church .S
S, in preaching a funeral, I believe the basic thing would be to present the gospel in the light of the mortality of everyone present. If it is a funeral of someone you don’t really know, leave any personal references to family members who usually will present a eulogy, or remembrances.
Test or Technique?
I hope you’re doing well. In writing, I’ve noticed a modern “measurement” people have been using to determine whether females are receiving “proper representation” in media called the Bechdel Test. A quick internet search defines it here:
“To pass, a work must feature at least two named women who have a conversation with each other about something other than a man. It was introduced by cartoonist Alison Bechdel in 1985.”
Obviously, this isn’t something special or new necessarily, since this happens frequently even in older fictional works. It’s also, at face value, harmless. However, I’m more skeptical as to the reason it exists, and how people have used it since its inception in the 1980’s. What are your opinions on this, and how ought we to think of it in light of creating fictional works? I’m not someone who purity spirals, so I think that if something that isn’t sinful/evil exists as a way to tell a story, we’d be fools not to plunder the Egyptians. However, if something is flawed from the start, I’d like to know before I mix nuclear waste into my omelette, as it were.ON
ON, that might be a fine thing to introduce into your novel, provided it fits with what you are doing in the story. But as a Rule or a Test, I think it is a really bad idea. Everything rides on what the story is about. If Austen had had Elinor and Marianne get into a discussion of how a steam engine worked, they would have thereby passed the test . . . and ruined the book.
Presbyterian and Evangelical
I’ve been reading your book Against the Church (acquired from the NQN dealz), and in the spirit of the Golden Rule, I believe I caught an errant Scripture quote (on page 106 of my Kindle version): “But this new life has come to pass in a new world, a world or age that Jesus called the Regeneration” should be a reference to Matt. 19:28, not Matt. 19:2. Christ healing the crowds may be a sign and portent of the regeneration (Isa. 53:5), but I never took you to be that subtle. So if you hadn’t already been made aware of it, there ya go.
And delightful book, by the way! As a Baptist, I concur in heartily applauding your evangelical-ness while being entirely bewildered by what you’ll do with the babies. Though I’m also a bit bewildered by your systematic: you really need to grant the reprobate the honor of “covenant member”? Hebrews 8:8ff, man!Nicholas
Nicholas, you are right about the Scripture citation, thanks. But alas, you are wrong about the babies. Don’t forget, just a few chapters later, that we have a class of persons who trample underfoot the blood of the covenant, by which they were sanctified (Heb. 10: 29).
An Ogden Comment
Thank you for speaking about the Ogden guys (or Absalom, as I call Sauvé). Even if it weren’t for the Nazi stuff, he’s sketchy. He spends an odd amount of time online looking for people talking about him, leaving a snarky remark/reposting to summon his groupies, and then they fill the comment section with “I’m loyal to Brian!” cringiness. Mormons aren’t the only cultists in Utah. Come to think of it, awkward, downcast men were Hitler’s target audience too. Easy prey, I suppose.HL
HL, I agree about the sketchy parts, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say they are cultists. Their theology is orthodox.
I was reading through the CREC Governing Documents and when I came across Article IV on The Broader Assemblies and was reading about their specific authority in A2k: “to mediate when a local church’s session is a party in a dispute with the session of another CREC church, with a CREC broader assembly, or with a non-CREC church,” I couldn’t help but wonder about how you sometimes write about the Ogden crew or about Joel Webbon (I agree with you!). Does that kind of thing get brought up in your presbytery or session? I didn’t even know what a session was so I assume this may not even apply to you since you alone aren’t the session. I was raised in nondenominational churches most my life so I’m just now learning about this kind of stuff. I read on your blog the timeline of events with the Ogden group stuff but I don’t remember there being anything on their about your Presbytery. Would they try to mediate in a situation like this? Was curious how it worked. Thanks for all you do!JC
JC, we would be open to something like that, but the appeal for it would have to come from the non-CREC side. If the initiative came from us, it would be proposing that our presbytery take charge of them, which would be offensive. But if they felt wronged by us (or by me), they would be free to appeal. But to avoid wasting everybody’s time, they would then have to agree to abide by the decision.
Limits of Resistance
I understand your position to be that both the civil magistrate and the citizenry are subordinated to the Constitution as the highest legal authority in the land (an application of the Lex Rex). My question is about the threshold for resistance: How do we biblically transition from passive civil disobedience (refusing to obey an unlawful command) to active, armed rebellion against that same authority? At what point does a violation of the Constitution justify taking up arms under the direction of lesser magistrates?Tyler
Tyler, the Reformers hammered out an understanding of various thresholds of resistance. First you preach against the oppression. The second thing you do is flee from it. And finally, the third thing, the point of final resistance, is you take up arms defensively only. You never try to overthrow the authorities, but you do sometimes defend yourselves.
Planting a School
Just saw a couple of podcasts you did with great guys in Rome, GA. We barely missed you, our CREC congregation meets about 30 mins away in the town next to it, would have loved to have you worship with us. Our session of elders just approved the launching of an exploratory committee, with the purpose of doing recon on the planting of a CCS in our town. For the committee, what are 2-3 books or resources you would recommend them to read? Grateful for you!B
B, I would recommend The Case for Classical Christian Education, Repairing the Ruins, and Excused Absence.
Surrogacy
I was looking at the video on surrogacy. What is your take on a child conceived with the egg of the mother who will raise him and the sperm of the father who will raise him? Something wrong with the mother’s parts, so a surrogate is used. Should Christians consider surrogacy to rescue all of those kids in fertility freezers?Zeph
Zeph, I am not a big fan of any form of surrogacy. I cannot say it is absolutely unlawful, but I believe we are maneuvering ourselves into a very bad place. Even with adopting snowflake babies, while I applaud the adoption part, I don’t know how it can be done without helping to juice the demand for more.
Two Answers
In the blog post titled “Juletters, you answered a question about church leadership that caught my attention. I am a member of a Baptist church and the very questions and thoughts James described are ones that we are having here. I would like to have more clarity on a couple of things you said in your response to him. These may be very basic questions. Do excuse my lack of knowledge about Presbyterian church polity.
You said that, “In our system, I as the lead pastor answer to the elders”. What do you mean you answer to the elders? You also said that your vote is “counted the same way as the others are, but is weighed differently”. How so?Jiby
Jiby, what I mean is this. The session of elders has the authority to tell me that they would like a sermon series in Leviticus. They have the authority to set my salary. They have the authority to dismiss me from my post. With regard to your second question, suppose we are discussing a proposal, debating it in session. If we are debating it, my support (or opposition) is going to carry greater weight with the other elders, thus influencing them. But if it came down to a vote, I only get one vote.
My wife and I are trying to raise our kids according to the principles published by Canon and are facing opposition from both families who embrace gentle parenting. I have two daughters, ages 2 and 7 months. Spanking is our primary tool for child discipline for our two-year-old who is more obstinate and defiant than I and my siblings were (according to my mom, we were pretty compliant). We vary between 1 to 3 swats and intensity depending on the offense. While staying with my parents for over a week, my mother demanded that we not spank our child while under her roof and that if we had to discipline my daughter, it had to be “time outs.” My wife had a separate conversation with her where my mother stated that we were committing “parental abuse” and that my daughter would grow to assault other people including us. I was spanked as a child and never dreamed of striking my mother; I have yet to receive an apology from her if what she did to my siblings and I was abuse. I agreed to my mother’s terms since we were staying with them; however, my daughter’s behavior deteriorated as the week progressed despite the “time outs.” She was screaming and fighting my wife. Our daughter’s behavior improved over a week after we returned home and resuming spanking. My wife and I live in west Michigan and my parents live in central New York (550 miles away by car). I told my wife that we will be staying in an Airbnb for a shorter duration instead of lodging with my folks for a week the next time we visit them. Fortunately my wife’s parents are local and we limit our time with them so our parenting doesn’t upset them too much. What advice do you have for how we deal with both families, especially for the conversation with my parents that we’ll no longer be staying with them until our children are old enough where we stop spanking? How do I deal with any fallout with my siblings and extended family? My mother is likely to draw others into our conflict because she is bitter that I rejected her worldview years ago. Thank you.
Sincerely,Brent
Brent, it appears to me that you are handling it the right way. And when the conversation happens as to why you won’t be staying with them, be clear and direct. The charge of parental abuse is a very weighty one, and so you don’t want to put them in the position of having to act on their opinion (e.g. by calling CPS). If they throw down and say that if you don’t stay with them, you are not welcome at all, then I would encourage you not to go at all. And of course, if you are there for dinner, say, I would not spank your children with your parents anywhere around.
Slavery Once More
I had read that on a NPR article you support slavery ? I’m not one to jump to conclusions. Thus, I hoping to get clarity from you. Thank you. Have a super evening.Rick
Rick, here is a link to a breakdown of my views on slavery. Or you could get my book Black and Tan.
Santa Questions
I have a question about how to handle Santa. My wife and I have decided not to do Santa with our kids (4 and 1). We believe it’s a lie and takes the focus off of Christ at Christmas. It hasn’t been a problem until this year, but now our 4-year-old is aware of other kids at school having visits from Santa. Also, our family (who are all Christians) thinks our stance is ridiculous, but that hasn’t deterred us.
*By way of interesting observation, the most vehement opposition to parents not promoting Santa Claus has come from believers. It seems as though this really hits a nerve with Christians. I don’t know why . . . Conviction, maybe?
My question is this: how did your family handle this? And, more importantly, what should we tell our kids about Santa? So far, we’ve opted to say, “Santa doesn’t bring gifts to our house. Mommy and Daddy give you gifts.” Should we say “Santa isn’t real,” “Santa is pretend,” or “Santa is make-believe but was based on a real person?” Any advice is appreciated!Caleb
Caleb, we never made a thing about Santa coming, but we did do Santa-related things (e.g. having stocking gifts). I don’t think it is lying if the story is told to the kids as a story, and not as though it were real. I would have been willing to do that on moral grounds, but I don’t think it is that good a story. But it should be possible to avoid telling the Santa story in your home without antagonizing anybody else. You need to make sure that you do teach your kids to not go around popping the balloons of all the neighbor children though. That will antagonize.
American Reading
It’s probably an understatement to call you “well-read”. Do you have any suggestions for someone who is interested in learning more about American history? Best authors? Preferably books that are as unbiased and non-revisionist as possible. I follow current politics but I am still leaning on my high school history class which was mostly just watching Band of Brothers.Historically Curious
HC, start with Gregg Singer’s A Theological Interpretation of American History. Then move on to Gary DeMar’s America’s Christian History.
An Immigration Challenge
I can’t say I have ever figured out the passion you and many others have for the regulation of immigration, and widespread deportation—as opposed to, say, a new ID card and a slap-on-the-wrist fine for making the paperwork more of a nuisance. Actual criminals? Deal with them ourselves, no point turning them loose on a country of origin that clearly couldn’t hold them either. I can’t find any indication in Scripture that immigration is a problem for the government to “manage” to begin with—we owe that idea, historically, to the megalomaniacal progressive vision. Before that, all parties I am aware of seemed agreed that greater population was a good thing, a blessing.
Of course, “before that” citizenship also meant something—there were people other than bureaucrats and peons. And speaking of bureaucrats, a government that can arrest immigrants for summary deportation can call opponents “immigrants,” and with no proper process such “mistakes” are conveniently hard to rectify. Even supposing the current administration were acting in complete good faith, the precedent it sets for the future should alarm us all.
While I respect the dissenting justices in this ruling, I can’t see that they proved anything beyond the existence of an understandable undercurrent of dissent to the mainstream of the common law. Maybe the dissent would be better law; but it’s not the law we have. New circumstances may require new law: but until we get it we obey the old.
I quite agree with you that citizenship is a different matter than mere residence. But the citizenship question—”jurisdiction” and all—is quite handily answered but Justice Kavanaugh’s suggestion that we legally codify a new standard exemption to the standard “soil” definition of jurisdiction. You yourself noted this—and it seems to me could have ended your notice of the ruling there.
Respectfully,Jonathan
Jonathan, “The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee very high; and thou shalt come down very low. He shall lend to thee, and thou shalt not lend to him: he shall be the head, and thou shalt be the tail” (Deuteronomy 28:43–44).
So Then
Let me begin by expressing my deep and heartfelt gratitude to you for the many ways in which your life and ministry has helped me over the years. My childhood best friend attended New Saint Andrews before marrying a great girl he met there. My friend once took me to Christ Church where I got to hear you preach, and I even had the unique honor of attending a Bible study gathering at your father’s home—what an amazing man he was. You wouldn’t know me from Adam, but suffice it to say you have been one of the most influential voices in my life when it comes to faith, family, and Christian living. I wish I could say that I always lived out the advice you gave, but sadly as you will see here, that has not always been the case. I very much appreciate you—and would like to voice that at the outset. It’s precisely because of this high level of trust and influence that I am writing to you. Simply put, I trust your opinion more than most others. Should this letter make it to you, I am hoping that you might be willing to help me process an internal battle that has plagued me for a few years now.
For brevity’s sake I will try my best to get to the main point first and then provide some context. At the core of the matter is the question of whether I am really saved—if I am a Christian. I’m sure I am not the first person to approach you with questions regarding the warning passages of Hebrews 6 and Hebrews 10, but between the years 2019 and 2020 I made a large-scale shipwreck of my life and have struggled to know whether I can have assurance of salvation since.
Having laid that foundation, here’s the context—
I was not raised in a Christian home, but if you would have asked me when I was converted I would have always told you that it happened at age eleven after hearing the Gospel from an extended family member. In the years that followed I became involved in a local youth group, was discipled by multiple pastors, taught at Bible studies, and experienced what I would call a very deep walk with the Lord. I married my high school sweetheart at age 19, attended church regularly, was baptized, and tried my best to grow in the faith. I studied the faith deeply—I read many books by authors such as: Jonathan Edwards, Calvin, John Piper, you, John MacArthur, etc. I say all this to communicate the fact that if in any way we are judged based on what we know, I knew the answers. I cannot claim ignorance.
As a 19-year-old husband, one thing that I brought into my young marriage that I had not yet dealt with was a lust issue. Nothing that would fall into the category of terribly out-of-the-ordinary or grotesque, but still sinful—still infidelity. This is something that I dealt with off and on for six years—and I was warned by my (then) wife and pastor / mentor on multiple occasions that I could lose my marriage if I did not cut this issue out of my life. Unfortunately, I succumbed to temptation again and again. Eventually at the age of 25 my worst fear came true—my wife left. We had pastoral oversight during this time and the pastor determined that there were Biblical grounds for divorce in his judgment if she no longer wanted to stay. I tried everything in my power to reconcile the relationship at this point, but it was too late. My wife filed for divorce, and so began a steep downward spiral in my life.
It was at this point that I went entirely off the rails. The pain and consequence of losing my bride was more than I could bear. When she left, I instantly lost an amazing family, my dog, all my money, all my furniture, everything—all in a day. I began going to bars and nightclubs, drinking heavily, abusing substances, sleeping around, fornicating, and sinning more than I ever had in my life. I became someone I never imagined that I would be. It was by all accounts a full-blown prodigal son rebellion moment. I was running from God—totally blinded by rage, grief, failure, and sorrow. The worst part was that it was my fault. People tried to tell me that my wife wanted to leave previously and that she had “found her way out” through the circumstances; however, whether this was true or not, I’ll never know. It didn’t change the fact that I was guilty—I was in the wrong.
This severe season of sin went on for at least a year—repeated, unrepentant, blatant rebellion. The whole time I knew that the way I was living was wrong, but I just didn’t stop. To this day when I see photos of myself and the deadness in my eyes during that time period it sickens me. I would pray from time-to-time, but most of it was just apologizing to God for the wreckage I had created in my life and marriage.
Time passed and eventually something particularly interesting happened. By chance, I became acquainted with a woman named M who was about my age, who knew who I was, and who also knew my story. In a pretty wild sequence of events, she told me that in 2019 my ex-wife’s sister had asked her to meet with my wife and encourage her as she was considering the divorce. M met with my ex-wife for coffee prior to the divorce and later told me that she had encouraged my ex to stay with me and reconcile the marriage during that meeting. I had never met M or ever heard of her before. Fast-forward a bit and in March of 2021 I married M and we now have one small son and another on the way.
My life since meeting M has moved in an upward direction. I’ve repented of my sins, started attending a fantastic church, started a family, and really been making an effort to move in a God-ward direction.
I am now 32 years old and throughout the past couple of years I have been trying to dig through the rubble of my past decisions to know where I stand with God. I’m trying to assess what happened, how I fell so far, and whether or not it is possible that a truly converted man could fall into such a horrendous state as I did. I know that my salvation has nothing to do with my works, and that it is all of Christ. I am leaning on Christ, trusting and believing that His sacrifice is enough for even the worst of sinners like myself. However, in my reading of Hebrews 6 and Hebrews 10, I am finding myself wondering if these passages are saying that it is not possible for me to be restored to repentance in God’s eyes. It seems as though these passages are describing a category of person who has trampled underfoot the Son of God so grievously that they have essentially sinned themselves out of eligibility for salvation and out from under the covering of the sacrifice. If this is the case, then that is certainly a problem. I would greatly appreciate your insights on this, as well as any other counsel you may have.
With Much Sincere Appreciation,F
F, you cited the parable of the prodigal son, and that is what you are dealing with here. High folly, deep repentance, and restored fellowship with the Father. God has never turned away a repentant sinner, and He is not going to start with you.
As for Hebrews 10, let me place it in its historical context via an extended paraphrase.
“For if we sin wilfully by going back to the blood of bulls and goats after we have received the knowledge of the truth, the truth that Christ died once for all, there no longer remains an efficacious sacrifice for sins at the Jerusalem Temple, where you want to go, but rather just a fearful expectation of judgment and fiery indignation that will consume the city of Jerusalem as Jesus promised, and which will devour the adversaries” (Hebrews 10:26–28).
As for Hebrews 10, let me place it in its historical context via an extended paraphrase.
“For if we sin wilfully by going back to the blood of bulls and goats after we have received the knowledge of the truth, the truth that Christ died once for all, there no longer remains an efficacious sacrifice for sins at the Jerusalem Temple, where you want to go, but rather just a fearful expectation of judgment and fiery indignation that will consume the city of Jerusalem as Jesus promised, and which will devour the adversaries” (Hebrews 10:26–28).
Daniel, on hard providence, Pastor Wilson is correct about the sovereignty of God – he will work all things out for the good of those who love him (Rom.8:28). That incredible good (which we unfortunately don’t always value nearly as much as our temporal happiness) is expanded on further in verse 29 – being conformed to the image of Christ (see also James 1:2-4). But something very important should be added to this topic – lament. Lament is not popular. Indeed, much of North American Christianity completely ignores lament in favor of a “rah, rah” triumphalism Christianity. But lament permeates… Read more »
“He will work all things out…”?…or…”In all things God…”?
There’s a difference.
“Daniel, on hard providence, Pastor Wilson is correct about the sovereignty of God – he will work all things out for the good of those who love him” Curious why you bring in the word “sovereignty” when it doesn’t apply. In both views, God is entirely sovereign over events. Daniel wasn’t claiming a lack of sovereignty. Just the opposite, he was blaming God for his actions *because* he believes God to be fully in control. Its a tendency with the language that I notice with Calvinists generally, though I don’t want to accuse you specifically without you elaborating first, that… Read more »
On surrogacy, I’m a bit surprised by what Pastor Wilson writes about adopting snowflake babies, namely that when Christians do this, (though the adoption part is applaudable), they are “helping to juice the demand for more.”
By this reasoning, should Christians not have rescued and adopted unwanted babies left at garbage heaps in the early centuries after Christ’s life on earth (something, I think most Christians would support as incredibly virtuous)? Would this not have also “juiced the demand for more”?
Or am I missing an important premise that distinguishes these two scenarios?
There is an additional factor vs the garbage heaps. Adoption surrogacy still requires the doctors and drugs and treatments and facilities. Money is paid, money is made. It is more profit for IVF as an industry and a justification for those who wish to use such services (oh, someone else can just adopt the babies i leave in the freezer).
No one profited when rescuing them from the garbage heaps.
Am i convinced such adoption is wrong? Not entirely yet. But it sure isn’t clearcut, and i lean away from the whole thing.
F, Thank-you for being willing to post. It’s probably was not easy to do – even anonymously. Please know that you are not unique in your struggle – trust me! And trust God (1 Corinthians 10:13). Your wrestling with doubt and whether you can be saved after your past – this is spiritual warfare. Satan is trying to make you doubt God’s grace and steal away the joy of your salvation (Psalm 51:12). I have a few resources I’d highly recommend considering. One, read through chapter 5 of the Canons of Dort (consider especially articles 4-9, and 11). You can… Read more »
Regarding Creeping Feminism; According to the WW2 history book, Daddy’s Gone to War, by WM. Tuttle, wedding rings only became popular with men during the WW2 time. Should we consider wedding rings for men, creeping egalitarianism?
The UK royals still don’t do it.
They didn’t start out that way although I think we could regard a wife’s insistence that either they both wear wedding rings or neither will as an example of creeping egalitarianism. But some men wear wedding rings for other reasons. Some social research has shown that white collar men wearing wedding rings make a more favorable impression on management. (This doesn’t apply to men who work with their hands because rings can be a safety hazard.) Married men are, in general, more highly regarded in the workplace than single men. Rightly or wrongly, they are judged as more reliable, more… Read more »
I don’t wear a ring. The way I announce I am married to a woman I just met usually goes along the lines of,” Oh my wife would be interested in that.” The I know that asking my question isn’t going to stop men from wearing rings, but the idea that men rings is a 20th Century invention made me wonder of the origin of this practice.
Any ideas on how we can rescue the children in the fertility clinics who are sitting in cryofreeze?
Those aren’t children. How about we focus on rescuing real, living children who are starving, homeless, poor, hurting or in need rather than worrying about anything in cryofreezers.
Porque no las dos? (You’re probably too young for that reference.)
Because an attitude of indifference to children still in the womb will not morph into caring for those who have been born.
Tell you and yours that…y’all act like you care, but why the disregard for mother and child after the baby is born? Why can’t the church meet everyone’s needs? Sure should be able to…
I can’t speak for the States but in the UK evangelicals and the broader Christian constituency have had a pretty good record on dealing with social issues, from legislation to curb the exploitation of children in the Victorian era to fostering babies in the present.
Fostering may be less now as the secular authorities will not place babies with anyone who is not in favour of LGBTQ, the irony of which is not lost on me as except theoretically B that grouping by definition cannot have children.
You know, like Jesus instructed…
ON, the Bechdel Test isn’t meant to be “used” when writing fiction. Obviously, passing the Bechdel Test is easy and doing so doesn’t tell you a great deal about whether the book represents women well or not – a single conversation in a 280 page book doesn’t tell you much of anything about the full book.
The Bechdel Test is just an awareness device meant to bring attention to how many books (and movies) don’t pass it, and what that says about our literary culture and whether or represents the experiences of women or not.
Jonathan, it is extremely sad to see you put together such a passionate argument from basic conservative principles, one that is in line with all the words of Christ and the Biblical witness on how we should treat aliens, and then see Pastor Wilson respond by merely proof-texting a line that doesn’t have any command in it, or application to us as Christians at all. You have to remember that Pastor Wilson grew up in a racially segregated society, one which at the time was tacitly supported by his family, and is, in his own words, a Paleo-Confederate. He wrote… Read more »
Well said.
Poorly said.
Rebut then
I love your entitlement mentality. Typical leftist.
Doug’s use of Scripture was apropos, explained his position, and has direct application for us, both as Christians and as a nation, today.
Not Doug’s fault that you and Koinonia routinely recoil at quoted Scripture like a vampire to a cross. Par for the course for those who come here with their Jesus Actually Agrees With Me and Anyone Who Disagrees With Me Hates Jesus schtick.
His use of scripture, to this in particular but regularly as well, is out of context…what did Jesus say? Love god, love others. How did he live? Loving completely…that’s the example we should be following, not Doug’s selective “love”. What about Matt. 25:35? I don’t recoil from scripture…I recoil from people who misuse it:)
“Whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth,
and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth”?
Triune Jehovah’s definition of “love” may differ a bit from some modern notions.
I can do it, too:) Psalm 145:9 The Lord is good to all; he has compassion on all he has made. 2 Peter 3:9The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. Zephaniah 3:17 The LORD your God is with you, the Mighty Warrior who saves. He will take great delight in you; in his love he will no longer rebuke you, but will rejoice over you with singing.” Romans 8:38-39 NIV For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons,… Read more »
I’m not discounting the fact that you and Pastor Wilson might just being trolling to find the most out-of-context possible arbitrary verse for any particular claim. When discussing our command to love, why would you use a verse that has nothing to do with our command to love? Why not use one of the verses where God specifically tells us how he wants us to love in this situation? 1. The Judgement of the Nations (Matthew 25:31-46). It explicitly tells us that we will be judged based on whether or not we welcome strangers. “Then the king will say to… Read more »
Ain’t nothing that can make a Pastor Wilson crowd fall into total silence like preaching from the gospels.
Well, the claim that Doug is representative of
” a culture that defined itself around these principles of white solidarity and ethnic homogeneity. To live in anything different would be like dishonoring one’s parents and heroes, and that’s very hard for someone from that kind of culture to do. So preserving an incredibly artificial construct like whiteness or a majority-White society”
is pretty silly on its face when half of what Doug has done these past two years is argue AGAINST white solidarity, against the opposition of numerous white nationalists who come to the board and attack him.
Not my quote, but ok. Doug says he’s paleo-confederate…what does that mean?!?
I believe, from what I have read, that use of the term paleo-confederate is intended to distinguish one’s views from those of neo-confederates. Paleoconfederates are generally willing to concede that slavery as practiced by the Confederate states was morally wrong. They don’t concede that the Civil War was necessary to end slavery or that the federal government was morally or constitutionally justified in using military force against the southern states. They also believe the Confederate states held the high ground culturally and constitutionally. States’ rights, small government, the primacy of local government, religious orthodoxy, and the superiority of an agrarian… Read more »
I’m guessing neo-confederates do not take the opposite view on all of that, so I wonder how much daylight there really is between them and “paleo-confederates”. Since the historical confederates held their practice of slavery to be a moral imperative, I’d say paleo-confederates calling it a moral wrong are kidding only themselves about the “paleo” part. Or kidding the rest of us as to what they really think.
You asked others to refute the claim.
That’s not your quote, but that’s the claim you asked others to refute.
Doug wants the actions of White solidarity without the taint of saying White solidarity. I’ll ask a few specific questions, not exactly expecting answers because that’s not your style, but just to put them out there. #1: Do you believe that the League of the South is built on White solidarity, or not? If so, then why has Wilson backed it in word and deed? #2: Do you believe that the Confederacy was primarily defined around White solidarity or not? If so, then why does Wilson identify with it so strongly and treat its greatest (and most violent) defenders as… Read more »
“I’ll ask a few specific questions, not exactly expecting answers because that’s not your style” I’ve answered every question of yours that you’ve asked me that I’ve ever seen. I tend not to skulk about the previous Tuesday’s page as we get closer to the next Tuesday’s page. This is not my job and you are not my mother. I owe you nothing. “#1: Do you believe that the League of the South is built on White solidarity, or not? If so, then why has Wilson backed it in word and deed?” I have no idea, and don’t care either… Read more »
#1: You have no idea, and don’t care either way, whether Douglas Wilson has defended a White Supremacist organization? An organization whose aim is to have the South secede from the Union and return it to White rule? An organization that openly partners with neo-Nazi groups to reach its goal? You said, “give a quote”, as if he’s just said something here or there. Hmm, let me make a list….. * Gave a conference about Confederate history with the President of the League of the South, Michael Hill, and founding board member Steve Wilkins * Cowrote a book about Southern… Read more »
Also, your claim about my timing was goofy and misleading. I posted that on Wednesday, the day after the column, not anywhere near the timing for the next column.
And you “answer” questions by dodging them and coming up with excuses to not answer them, not by wrestling with the Biblical text and actually considering our duty to God. That’s your M.O. and you did it again here.
As a ten year veteran of the letters column, and the open comments beneath every article before that, Pastor Wilson simply does not give elaborate rebuttals in these posts. If he engages with an argumentative letter at all, it is brief, makes only a single point, and is frequently glib or unserious. As someone’s whose had letters responded to in that manner, it can be frustrating. That said, the context needs to be remembered. This is his website. He didn’t ask us to come here. He is under no obligation to give us any of his time, and if he… Read more »
With the seriousness of the issue, and the depth of his influence, justifying glib and unserious responses just because “he always gives those” isn’t a meaningful defense. Wilson has influence over people who can affect the lives of millions on an issue that was central to Jesus’s gospel – how we treat our neighbors, even the strangers from other lands, when we don’t identify with them. Teacher,” he said, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”……But wanting to vindicate himself, he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”……Which of these three, do you think, was a neighbor to the… Read more »
“ just because “he always gives those” isn’t a meaningful defense.”
That wasn’t a defense. That was merely showcasing that this wasn’t unusual behavior on this singular topic.
That he doesn’t owe you a response at all whatsoever was the defense.
That you ignore the heart of my point to misrepresent a side statement rather undercuts the moral high ground you were trying to take.
So long as we’re on the topic of salvation and eternal judgment…. “When the Son of Man comes in his glory and all the angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, and he will put the sheep at his right hand and the goats at the left. Then the king will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom… Read more »
Everyone here knows the passage and agrees with it. Its equally true and respected within your opponent’s worldview. Just quoting it means literally nothing.
If you want to make an argument that anyone is contradicting Scripture or running afoul of it, you’ll have to….. you know, do that. Merely trying to imply that your opponents are those described in a particular verse without substance is no more than childish name calling. You could skip the effort of copy pasting someone else’s text and call him a meanie poo-poo head.
I believe that Matthew 25 demonstrates that the predominant attitude we should have towards foreigners in need is to welcome them. And that not doing so is a judgment issue. That appears extremely clear from that text. I believe that the Parable of the Good Samaritan (where we are commanded to treat even foreigners of other faiths as our neighbors when the opportunity arises) further confirms that interpretation. I believe Deuteronomy 10:19, Job 31:32, Romans 12:13 and Hebrews 13:2-3 are among a dozen or so passages that confirm the same. “And you are to love those who are foreigners, for… Read more »
So if someone is espousing nazi rhetoric, as long as their orthodoxy is in line, that’s ok? Seems like it should be a hard nope. It shouldn’t matter if someone’s beliefs align but their words and actions don’t…what say you about their fruit? Not much Christ-like love it would seem…
The Democrat Party called. Says they’ve already paid off Graham Platner to get rid of him (seems the crime he committed is sexaully harassing a Democrat woman) and they’d like you to stop bringing it up.
Ken Paxton…Donald trump…RJ May…Stephen Buyer…names, names, names. There are always names…on both sides.
This desperate attempt of yours to scurry away from your Nazi-boy, like the rest of the Democrat cockroaches, is genuinely laugh-out-loud funny.
Here I am, now. Entertain me! It’s fun watching you flail around, making excuses for your pathetic fellow-leftists, as the far-left SPLC funds all the boogeymen you try to pin on the right. The Klan is yours — always has been, always will be.
I mean, yeah, the Democrats ran away from their deplorable candidate. While many were slow to do it and that’s not enough for me to want to be one of them, it’s certainly a point in their favor as opposed to doubling down on him and refusing to admit wrong (Roy Moore, Donald Trump, Pete Hegseth, Matt Gaetz for some).
Show me some excuses I’ve made; I’d love to know. Doug quotes past klan leaders…I don’t:) Doug backs and supports deplorable people like trump…I don’t:) Doug has said that slavery is mutually beneficial…I don’t:) Doug says that women are for making sandwiches and babies…I don’t:) Doug thinks that he’s right in his theology, actions and beliefs…I don’t:)
Anyone spouting Nazi rhetoric is not orthodox in the faith!
Would you also agree that anyone who supports race-based slavery and/or the KKK should not be looked to for theological and moral teachings?
I heartily second Andy’s recommendation of Coffee & Covid.