Here is a video my son in law Tim, who is part of Liberty Coalition. He put together a short video explaining the trucker convoy entering Ottawa in protest to the vaccine mandates.
Love what you folks are doing.
Blair, thanks very much. The truckers up there have been a great encouragement.
Is this Dawson fellow real? Asking for a friend.
Martyn, no, he is not. He is a phantom nephew.
I’ve grown up somewhere around 1 point complementarian, if you are using John Pipers definition, “ God created man and women equally but with differing roles in the home.” I’ve recently come across your work in the last few months and have started trying to seek out the absolute truth in this topic. Not many of the works done on this topic address the arguments of egalitarians but rather just assume the listener is already convinced. I’ve sparked discussion with one of my pastors and he told me to read the following to see from his point of view. Could you possibly give your perspective/rebuttal to this blog? It would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!
Colton, thanks for writing. In looking at that blog post, what I see are feeeelingzzz, and a promise of exegesis to come. But the feelings have already set the pitch for the song.
The Same Thing
I know when “the end of the age” is mentioned in Matthew 24:3 it is referring to the end of the Jewish age, but what about when it is used in Matthew 28:20? ” . . . and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”
Is Jesus using the phrase to represent the end of the church age there? Curious to hear your thoughts. Thank you and God bless!
Joel, no, I don’t think so. Since the end of the Judaic aeon was going to be so tumultuous, Jesus is promising to be with them all the way through it. But I don’t think it would be a valid implication to say that He would then leave them on their own for the church age.
An Old Canon Course?
This is not that critical of a question but I’d like to know if the OT Survey in the old Canon Press Bible section. That was a great course, will it come back?
Connie, I don’t know what course you are referring to. Can you give more details?
New Birth Mechanics
My son asked me, “How do I believe in Jesus?” The only thing I could think to say was, “You must be born again.” He asked, “What do I have to do to be born again?” I said, “There isn’t anything anyone can do. It’s something God has to do.” He said, “Oh, I know. It will happen when I’m baptized at church.” I said, “If you believe, God makes promises to you in your baptism, yes.” We talked about more after that, but I’m wondering if my response was okay. It seems a little hopeless to tell someone they must be born again and there’s nothing they can do to be born again. What do you think?
Kevin, the new birth is the work of God, and so we should not hover over it, trying to analyze it as it happens. We are told to repent and believe, and so we should focus on that. Repent of your sins (and we know what those are), and trust in Christ (as He is represented to you in the gospel). So your answer was correct—the new birth is the gift of God. But we know by looking away from ourselves and to Christ.
Are you familiar with Robert Louis Dabney? American theologian and thinker—circa 1800’s. This is a statement he made on conservative politics. Seems to be still applicable. What are your thoughts?
“This is a party [established conservativism] which never conserves anything. Its history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is to-day one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will to-morrow be forced upon its timidity, and will be succeeded by some third revolution, to be denounced and then adopted in its turn. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward towards perdition. It remains behind it, but never retards it, and always advances near its leader. This pretended salt hath utterly lost its savor: wherewith shall it he salted? Its impotency is not hard, indeed, to explain. It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It intends to risk nothing serious, for the sake of the truth, and has no idea of being guilty of the folly of martyrdom. It always—when about to enter a protest—very blandly informs the wild beast whose path it essays to stop, that its ‘bark is worse than its bite,’ and that it only means to save its manners by enacting its decent rôle of resistance. The only practical purpose which it now subserves in American politics is to give enough exercise to Radicalism to keep it ‘in wind,’ and to prevent its becoming pursy and lazy from having nothing to whip.”
Allane, yes, I am familiar with Dabney, and have quoted that passage many times. It is exquisitely, painfully true.
In a 2004 post called “An unnecessary sabbath?” you interpreted Colossians 2:16 as referring to ceremonies that are to do with sacrifices. You back this up by citing Hebrews 10:1, noting that “shadows” refers to sacrifices. Do you still hold this position? If so, how does v17 of Colossians 2 fit into that interpretation, where Paul says the things in v16 “are a shadow of things to come”? Presently and at the time that he wrote the verse, a shadow of things to come. Because Hebrews 10:14 teaches us that the once for all, perfect sacrifice of Jesus Christ perfects the elect so that there is no need for another one. What I mean by that is, if Colossians 2:16 is sacrifices, they can’t have been a shadow of things to come post cross when Paul wrote it.
I believe the 4th commandment is binding on us today, but I’m in a sticky situation dealing with what biblical options I have for understanding Colossians 2:16,17. If we take v16 as referring to ceremonies only, then what is he saying that they “are” shadows of future heavenly realities? Or, do we have biblical warrant to take each of the shadows mentioned in v16 and say they are fulfilled in different ways and that the sabbath is still a binding commandment for us as we are not yet in the promised land (Hebrews 4)?
Jonty, I would go with the second option. DIfferent aspects of the OT law are fulfilled in Christ in different ways. We keep the Passover now by getting rid of the yeast of malice and wickedness. And because the seventh-day Sabbath was nailed to the cross, it rose again as the Lord’s Day on the first day of the week. I keep the sabbath, yes, but it is a resurrected sabbath.
An Old Publication
I hope this message finds you and yours doing well this Epiphany season.
I have always appreciated your work, then and now, even when I have not shared your convictions. During this season of life, the Spirit is using your work to offer my soul both solace and a good stirring, whether I like it or not.
I reached out to Canon Press about a title written by you to see about getting a copy of it. They told me they were not familiar with it and gave me this link to reach out to you directly. I hope this finds its way to you.
The title is: The Ungarbled Word: Straight Talk to Men on the Problem of Porn.
I had a copy but have since lost it. I’d like to revisit it for my bi-vocational work as a clinical chaplain and pastoral counselor.
Scott, everything in the booklet The Ungarbled Word was incorporated into my book Fidelity.
I’ve been looking for a classical Christian school here in Jacksonville for my grandkids. Here’s one. Thoughts? Any recommendations? Good questions to ask?
Jeff, I don’t know the schools there. But the questions I would ask would have to do with how readily do they incorporate parental help and input, how true they are to the founding vision of ACCS, and how resistant they are to every form of the woke business.
I have a question for you. In a recent video of yours, you mentioned something to the effect of – if postmilennialism is correct, then maybe our children shouldn’t be in public schools. Could I get an expanded explanation of that?
Now I should say, my children are NOT in public schools. So I agree with you. However I’ve only just begun (in the last year or so) to become convinced that the pre-mil view I was taught is not correct. And so I’m thinking if the post mil view is correct, and the world is going to become increasingly Christianized . . . and we are going into a battle that we are supposed to win . . .Wouldn’t it make sense that our children actually should go into the public schools and influence them for the Gospel?
Just something I’ve been wrestling with and thinking about lately. Would like to hear your response. Thank you very much my brother. Keep fighting the good fight.
Joel, I think that to the extent that government schools could be affected for the good, it is far more likely to happen as a result of competitive pressure from outside. If untrained kids really could be “salt and light” that would be a different matter, but I think that the influence unfortunately runs in the other direction.
Hello again! I have the opportunity to accept an administrative position at the local classical Christian school and have reason to believe I’ll eventually be given as much authority as I’m willing to accept. With that, my strong opinions, and my blurred understanding of the line between church and school, I am worried I may overstep my role as a Christian woman. Seeking a more biblical understanding. Thank you!
Sabrina, I don’t believe that Scripture prohibits a woman serving as a head of school. At the same time, I would prefer to hire a man for that position, provided he was equally qualified. I am afraid that won’t help much with your decision.
I’ve enjoyed your interaction with the well-written article by Aaron Renn on First Things. We all benefit from thoughtful awareness of what’s going on around us. No need for us all to agree up-front. (Though we all pursue unity in the end.)
I wondered if you had been reading the Boniface Option substack. The pastor who writes it is a Jim Jordan fan. I’m sure you’d have some disagreements with him, but the similarity in title was too much for me not to let you know.
Therefore, if we are going to embark on forming local Christian communities in the face of the chaos of imperial decline, which I think we should, it is of the utmost importance that we have an idea of the kind of men we should be forming. We need men who would trade the cloister for confrontation. Men who would trade the relative comfort of the monastery for missions and martyrdom. We need hard men for hard times. Thor’s Oak wasn’t felled because Boniface got the pagans to like him and think he was a pretty cool guy. These people hated him and his God. Thor’s Oak was felled because of the truth—the Jesus Christ is God, Thor is not.
Read the whole thing here:
Jason, thanks. Good stuff.
Stay at Home Dad
Thank you for taking the time to read my message. My brother and I have been discussing the pros and cons of being a stay at home dad if the wife makes more money and is the breadwinner. I understand that there are times when the wife might have to work to help make more money for the family or there might even be times when she does make more money, but is this set up something that a Christian should strive for? Thank you in advance!
Mary, I don’t think we should strive for that at all. We should strive for the opposite. There are two problems that will arise when men serve as Mr. Mom. The first problem is the obvious one, which is that he is no good at it. The second problem would be when he is good at it.
Biblical Foreign Policy
Question on a biblical stance to foreign policy.
The situation between Russia and Ukraine is escalating daily and is currently saturating the news cycles. Questions are being raised on whether the United States should be involved in this conflict and to what extent that involvement should be. Does the United States have an obligation to stand up for order when it comes to foreign affairs? With the current state of our own nation and it’s reckless stewardship of the economy and blatant attack on God’s created order it’s easy to think that we are in no position financially or morally to involve ourselves. How should we navigate this with a biblical worldview? And while on the subject of politics, here’s a bonus question. As Christians is pledging allegiance to the flag a form of apostasy? It seems to be the modern day form of offering our pinch of incense and proclaiming that “Caesar is Lord”.
Shane, two big questions there. On the pledge, I think it is still lawful to say because of the “under God” qualifier. But I don’t say “indivisible.” On the Ukraine, I don’t believe we have a generic obligation to be the world’s policeman, and ordinarily I think we should stay out of conflicts like the current one in Ukraine. But that one is more complicated because after the collapse of the Soviet Union, we talked Ukraine into giving up her nukes. We owe them something because of that.
This one is gonna be pretty broad so I get if you wont have much for an answer, but all the same I thought it couldn’t hurt to ask. I’m a husband, father, go to a faithful church, read my Bible, confess my sins, fight temptation, and pray my prayers. Don’t get me wrong, I fall short in everyone of these areas. But to the best I can see, I can honestly say all these are in play and not neglected. I also wouldn’t say I’m a cold Christian either. I get there is a difference between the head and heart and, I believe, I have tasted that the Lord is gracious and good. But with all that said, I am struggling in my walk and faith. I’m far more bitter and resentful than joyful. I try to give thanks, but also cannot seem to stop grumbling. I still struggle with the same sins now that I have for years. My marriage is not bad, but I don’t know that I would call it good either. And it seems like the more I try to do something about any of this (including reading books, listening to sermons, and talking to people) It either makes a tiny temporary improvement, or more likely makes it worse because it has little effect and I’m bitter over my effort seeming to be for nothing. I would assume I am missing something, and have asked God what that is, but I am at a genuine loss. Like I said, I know its broad and there’s all kinds of details that play in here. But all the same, would you have any suggestion for me? Maybe somewhere to start, but assuming I’m at least aware of the basics?
Anon, you are right that something is wrong. You say that you confess your sins, but I would run a spiritual inventory to see if you are confessing the right ones. That would be the first thing. The second thing would be the content of the books you study. I would recommend you start working through the John Piper corpus.
The Biblical Work Week
I’ve read in several of your posts and replies to letters that you believe the prerequisite to a day of rest is that we are working six days. I’m curious what an ideal day or work would look like to you? My company lets us work a schedule of four ten hours days instead of five eight hour days. We have the option of working for overtime on the 5th and 6th day. Would the expectation of working overtime on the 6th day be different for someone who is working the 4-10 hour schedule vs the 5-8 hour schedule?
Aaron, I don’t see any problem with taking the 4 ten-hour days, but then I would make a point of working a day at home, or writing the great American novel, or working overtime for your employer. But I do think it is spiritually hazardous to have two or three days of rest a week.
Responsibility and Guilt
Concerning: Responsibility, Guilt, and the Ground of True Authority Would love to hear more about guilt and responsibility and the man’s duties within a marriage.
Luckily, I don’t have to do this for my own marriage. But I’ve been trying to do some hypotheticals in my head of a man who has a bad marriage with a wife that is grossly sinning. How to confront her? How to respond when confronting her when she says, “You aren’t being loving!” just because he’s pointing out her sin and trying to put a stop to it.
Or what actual power he has in the reality of this world, where he’d have little to no support from his church and then ultimately would very likely get screwed in the courts when she goes for divorce and realizes, “Fine, if he won’t let me sin in peace I’d be better off just getting half or more of his paycheck sent to me.”
Can you expand on that in a future post, real rubber meets the road of how a man implements this responsibility and authority thing in a world where he is largely stripped of power from other institutions that will view him as an ogre for doing the right thing?
I’d love to learn more about how to advice husbands that are going through these types of difficult times and even teach my sons better should they ever be in that situation.
Thanks for all your good teachings!
C, thanks. Yes, this is the crux of the difficulty. The husband has been stripped of any enforcement mechanism, and has no real back-up from other societal institutions. Consequently, I advise men to marry godly women in the first instance. Second, if it is too late for that, then I would advise them to live in such a way as to bring everything to a head, where the wife either repents of her sin, or leaves. But I am here talking about the extraordinary cases.
Charm is Deceitful But . . .
How important is physical attraction in dating? I know it should be after godliness and character, but what if I don’t feel any attraction to this girl? I’m going to have a hard time leading and pursuing.
IT, it is not the most important thing, but it is an important part of the married relationship. You should not pursue a woman if you know that the combustible materials are not there.
More on Peterson
Pastor Wilson, I noticed you did a video recently on Jordan Peterson’s interview on Joe Rogan and I’d love to hear your response to his common answer when he is asked if he believes in God (This is a good version of his response here. I think he actually gives a fascinating answer, which is basically—how can I say I truly believe in God if I continue to live in sin, if I’m not able to live a life as Christ did? I would greatly appreciate hearing your response to that.
Thank you for your time,
Todd, I think that is a good answer, and shows that he is standing on the brink of repentance.
Headship and Redemption
I’ve been having creational/postmillennial conversations with friends concerning the total fall of Adam infecting everything in creation, and thus necessitating Christ’ redemption as comprehensive as well, here’s the question they posed to me about definite atonement from a non-reformed perspective (knowing that I am a reformed postmillennial). “In Genesis 3, we see that not only did man fall, but that a curse was placed upon creation itself as a result of man’s sin. in Romans 8, I believe Paul references this curse upon creation that came as a result of sin. Thus, sin has something of a cosmic impact and not just an impact upon individual human beings and their salvation. With that being said, what would you say to the idea that Jesus had to atone for all sin in general in order reverse the impact of the curse upon creation since it is sin that led to the curse being put in place (Romans 8:20ff)? This would not mean that everyone is elect but that Jesus had to pay the penalty for all human sin in general in order to redeem creation as a whole.” Curious to hear your thoughts when you get a chance. God bless you and all of the kingdom work you’re engaged in. It was a pleasure meeting you at the Fight, Laugh, Feast Conference a couple of years ago!
Ben, because of Adam’s place as the vicegerent over creation, when he fell, the whole creation fell with him. Christ is a new Adam, and had authority over the whole created order also. Thus His redemptive act brought all of creation with Him.
This video popped up in my feed and I figured you’d enjoy it. To make matters sweeter, John has recommended your book, “Future Men,” as well. Thanks for all you do and continue to do. Stay faithful, brother.
By my count Canon Press has published 27 books admonishing and encouraging the married, 1 book admonishing and encouraging unmarried women, and 0 admonishing or encouraging unmarried men. What conclusion should an unmarried man looking for admonishment and encouragement draw from this statistic?
Harry, that we think you guys are doing great?
Obviously . . .
Been a long time since I’ve written, but I read the Friday concatenation consistently, and I am thankful for your biting insights. Regarding your recent article, “The Natural Use of the Woman” . . . As I was reading, it occurred to me that there was one more step to go in your Lego analogy: now that the male pieces have been filed down and the female pieces have been filled in—while the culture is trying to make them all look and function the same—the obvious end of this godless experiment is that they no longer HOLD together, for the protrusions of the male pieces are intended to fit together/into the female pieces. Thus, it is just a matter of time before the whole edifice comes crashing down. When that occurs, will the Son of Man find faith on the earth? (Luke 18:8) Let us pray that He does!
Thank you, again, for your writing ministry. Don’t always agree, but am very often edified. Grace and peace from Pittsburgh, PA.
I “discovered” your ministry and various postings on YouTube a couple years ago, during the time our world went stark raving mad and I was desperately searching for sane and sound voices, if for no other reason than to know we weren’t alone. I have since enjoyed and benefited from your videos, blogs, sermons, etc. You and your church are an important voice of biblical wisdom and practical application in today’s environment, especially as it relates to the woke church. I am concerned that it is only a matter of time before YouTube bans you guys. Those communists show their true stripes more and more every day. Have you considered adding your video content to Rumble or other alternative platforms?
Doug, thanks. Yes, we are doing some significant work to make our work cancel-proof, at least as much as possible.
The Invisible Church
A man attends your church’s worship service every couple of weeks, but doesn’t “belong” to it. He says; “I am a member of Christ’s Body (the broader church) in Moscow, and I serve the Kingdom of God in Moscow, but no one assembly is my home.”
Would you think this person is fine, hopping around several church’s all the time, as long as he confesses his allegiance to Christ and His Bride, the broader church? Or; would you suspect this person of running from commitment, not wanting to be “tied down” or held accountable to one congregation?
Would you and the Elders count this man among your ranks and assume accountability, as a Christian in Moscow, or would he only be counted upon his membership to your specific congregation?
Thank you for your work,
May His Grace be upon you.
Myles, he is not fine, but he would be welcome. If he got into serious sin, we would provide as much pastoral help as we could, but we would stop short of excommunication.
You’ve mentioned that Angels in the Architecture is the closest thing to a manifesto that you have. But it’s not on Canon+! Do you have plans to make that an audio book at any point and put it on Canon+?
Mitch, since that response, we have published Gashmu Saith It, which serves a similar purpose, and it will be on Canon + very soon. I have already done the reading for it. But hopefully everything will be available in audio at some point