The Letters Be Fine

Thank you for your ministry to the body of Christ over the years! I serve as an Elder in my local church and am wondering if you have any thoughts and recommendations on helping and working with those who have mental illnesses?

Dave

As a dairy farmer, I approve of all milk analogies.
That’s all.

Jordan

I am noticing an unusual lack of verbosity as it relates to the Epstein fiasco, Pam Bondi’s meltdown and twists and turns to apparently avoid prosecuting child molesters, the Trump administration’s shrugging off of Lutnick’s lies about his association to Epstein, etc.
What say you to these things? Is it possible that the Trump administration might be, gulp, a little morally lax not only on shooting white people as long as they don’t hate brown people but also on giving winking approval to pedophilia and child molestation?

Zach

My main takeaway from the Man Rampant convo with Tucker was how spiritually immature he is, and how he doesn’t realize there’s a difference between self-identifying as a Christian and embracing a pathway of spiritual discipleship aimed at growing in the grace and knowledge of Christ. Sincerity is no substitute for maturity. I wonder who might be in a position to present this possibility to him?

Michelle

When I saw that you had interviewed Tucker, I thought, “Finally, someone with a well-developed intellect will ask him some hard questions!” You did make a good effort, but in watching, I observed the tactics he uses to avoid those questions:
He cites random facts and statistics that one cannot fact-check in real-time, leaving interviewers with no meaningful counter-arguments. For example, imagine him saying, “I spoke with a Gaza survivor who told me that an IDF soldier is stealing food from daycare centers.” No one reputable has reported this, yet he demands that you disprove something he hasn’t bothered to prove. Nevertheless, he demands that they (who?) let cameras in. “Why won’t they let cameras in? Why are they hiding the fact that IDF soldiers are stealing from children?” It’s a simple appeal to ignorance that leaves even the most skilled interviewer (let alone listeners) holding the bag.
He does the exact thing he accuses Fuentes of—creates controversy/outrage, etc., to raise his profile among the faithful. The more push-back he gets, the better for his bottom line, whether that’s clicks, money, or both (or maybe he’s a true believer). He’s the master of this tactic, the exemplar. Perhaps Fuentes learned it from him—or the other way around.
He interrupts more than the average interviewee and filibusters to deflect and pivot.
At any rate, it’s incredibly challenging to pin him down and/or call him out. I appreciate your valiant effort to do just that on topics like radical Islam. He’s a very slippery cat.
Related, I was disappointed to read so many comments on your YouTube video (something you obviously do not control) speaking as if Israel is the Great Satan. Very little nuance. I know it’s the nature of things among the Very Online (and the bots), but I am thankful for your efforts to give some balance.
Warm regards,

Paula

I recently watched your interview with Tucker Carlson. You brought up the issue of him interviewing Nick Fuentes, saying in a sense that you can interview people you disagree with, but not if they have a view like Fuentes. I never listen to Fuentes, as I think he is a lunatic; however, you said that there is problem with platforming someone who has one foot on solid ground and the other in dog doo doo, which I find very hypocritical. You have and still continue to platform Roman Catholics and FV “dark stout” guys who are your buddies who propagate heresy! You know this is true. And I know that you will disagree using your “word smithy” psychology, but you can’t get around this fact. You do the same thing as what you accused Tucker of, which unlike Tucker, affects people’s souls, which in God’s eyes, holds greater weight.
P. S. Do more research into what Israel funds (i.e. Hamas, porn, etc.) before you go debate someone who actually has done the work.

Brady

Love you brother. You and Nancy have been wonderful influences in my life and the lives of my family and therefore, those that we influenced. Some of my kids did online school with you back in the day. I am not saying my following analysis is correct, but I do feel a little slippage has happened in your representation of yourself and therefore Christ. This is where I acknowledge looking from the outside in I may be, and hope I am off base. Your interview with Tucker did not go well in my opinion. I’m not sure if it’s your eschatology or something else but you seemed to let him off the hook somewhat. Missed opportunity for him and for those who watch it. Although I see you as gracious in your interactions with others, I don’t remember you tiptoeing around with others like you did with him. I could go on with details but won’t bore you. Please don’t get too sidetracked with personalities. Please continue to keep that loving boot on the neck. Teach the Word, preach the Word, shepherd the flock. God be with you. I look forward to fellowshiping in glory.

Luke

I enjoyed your interview with Tucker. I thought you did an admiral job in trying to pin him down on some of his blind spots. But one thing Tucker does well is doing mini-changes of the subject. It’s not full what-about-ism, but he often refuses to directly answer the question. Practically, it’s a great tactic to prevent from being pinned down, but I think it comes off as lacking full integrity of his convictions.
Separately, Tucker seems keenly aware of his own failings, which would include his mouth running faster than his filter. He acknowledged his need to apologize for what he said at the Kirk memorial, and it was a full-throated apology. But I don’t see that affecting his confidence in his views going forward. He makes his points with phrases like “well, this is obviously the case, no-one disagrees, it’s just fact.” Shouldn’t past sins or wrong views create some humility in your views going forward? This seems to be a pattern I see out in the world in general. Those who have changed their views the most in life seem most confident (and dare I say arrogant) in the views they hold in the present moment.
This is leading to my final question. How does someone with a public forum (like a pastor), who has changed his position on things over time, still have the confidence to speak with an authoritative word? How does one have the humility to admit, “I’ve been wrong in the past, I could be wrong in the present” while still speaking confidently and with authority.

Roger

You interview with Tucker was very enlightening. Especially when you questioned him a bit on his thinking behind interviewing Fuentes. This got me thinking in general about the discussions about public figures on the right today. There’s usually disagreements about who is being helpful and who is hurting. Just a few examples might include:
Ross Douthat and you
You and the Ogden boys
Allie Beth and the Ogden boys
Rigney+Allie and David French
Tucker and You
Tucker and Fuentes
I could go on and on with examples. But the discussion usually goes like this.
Accuser: “Do you think it is possible that your rhetoric can have a corrosive affect on people and lead to ungodly behavior?”
Response: “I think that is possible but only if they aren’t listening to the full context of what I’m saying. And I see many people being helped by what I’m saying.”
Accuser: “I think people are listening to what you are saying and the corrosive effect is far greater than any benefit.”
Response: “I disagree. I think the benefit far outweighs the downsides.”
Once the discussion reaches this point, there really isn’t any moving forward. One side points to 10 negative effects, then other side bring out 10 positive. It’s deadlocked and no amount of evidence moves the needle. So how does a bystander to many of these discussions (i.e., me) made a judgment call about whether a certain person is being generally corrosive or beneficial?

Nate

Loved the Tucker episode of MR. Thanks for all you do. My family is immensely blessed by your work. Grace and peace.

Will

After watching the video of your remarks at the Pentagon and the segment of the Tucker Carlson Show episode which featured Pr. Joe Rigney, I have a question.
In your talk at the prayer meeting, you addressed the need for a proper centering of God in the Christian heart, an understanding of the peace of God as God’s gift and not our achievement. Later (in the talk, but not in the written version on the website) you said that you believe that without the awakening in England there would have been a revolution “as ugly and as bad as the French revolution”
During the discussion of the disruption of a worship service in the Twin Cities by protestors, Pr. Rigney remarked that “Jesus is the most important person in the world.” Carlson then reframed the incident not as an attack on the Church, Christians, or the church leader associated with ICE, but as a violent attack on Jesus. Pr. Rigney’s response to this was to pivot to talking about Jesus as the answer to the sickness in our culture. IOW, when he was presented with the framing of Jesus as a victim he responded with the framing of Jesus as Lord.
It seems to me that both you and Pr. Rigney see the need for a cultural course correction, away from seeing ourselves as God’s protectors, and back to seeing ourselves as protected by God. Would you say that there’s a growing tendency among conservative American Christians to react defensively—to adopt a mindset either that we are victims, or that we have to be the force of good protecting the real victim, who is Jesus? And would you say that this mindset leads to further social upheaval and evil? (And if you’ve already addressed this, feel free to point me to where.)
I’ll add that I observed the victim mindset as the justification for ugly behaviour and violent rhetoric in progressive non-Christian circles a long time ago, and lately have seen it crop up in conservative Christian circles with more frequency.

Cat

Quick question: Are you particularly supportive of the May 17 gathering on the National Mall to which President Trump has invited all Americans for the purpose of re-committing the United States of America as “one nation under God”?
I was delighted to see you being prayed for by Pete Hegseth at the Pentagon! My wife of 50 years and I have gotten quite interested in what you are doing. We have 10 children, each of which are following the Lord (all 10 voted for Trump!) and we have 38 grand kids.
Blessings to you and yours!

Jack

I have been reading Black and Tan lately and enjoying it and I recently also read your run through of Gelernter’s book. Given your opinions on what constitutional government should have looked like it makes sense that an (almost) universally acclaimed great president like Lincoln would not be a president you approve of. Our intelligentsia always ranks the presidents highly that expanded the role and privileges of the government. Washington, Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, FDR, Johnson etc.
It got me curious as to what you think an actually great American presidency looks like. Could I coax you into telling us who you think our top 3 best presidents are and the bottom 3 worst?
Best,

Jeff

I hope you can help me locate an article and/or quote that I read a while back.
I think it was by C. S. Lewis.
It was something about having patience and/or love for one’s childhood and/or earlier life with all its mistakes, misunderstandings, errors, etc. that thereby enable one to have patience and understanding with others (children, teenagers, and adults) who (supposedly) are not as far along the same path you are on which you have (supposedly) overcome those difficulties, errors, thought processes, etc. and are now further along. VS. forgetting the kinds of struggles and errors you had to go through and so you look with contempt or impatience on those you imagine to be “behind” you in their journey, even though you had to travel the same road and learn the same lessons they are now traveling and learning.
That’s the best I can remember it and articulate it.
I hope it might ring a bell with you and you can point me to the exact article and/or quote.
I think it was C. S. Lewis.
Thanks a lot,

Robert

I hope you’re doing well. Forgive me for perhaps asking a somewhat silly question about literature. I’m finishing, and thoroughly enjoying, Crime and Punishment by Dostoyevsky. If you had someone like him in your congregation, how would you counsel such a person? That is, if you had met a person like him before he murdered someone. I know it’s a weird question, but I find that Raskolnikov’s character is oddly and somewhat bizarrely similar to certain trends in young people today.

ON

For a potential “Ask Doug”: Do (or should) the biblical prohibitions excluding women from certain roles/activity in the church equally apply in ‘parachurch’ settings, like at a Christian summer camp or a non-church affiliated campus ministry? For example, is it ever okay for a woman to teach a Bible Study to a coed staff at a summer camp, or is the prohibition meant only for corporate gathering of the church? Though the principal may be wise, is it a sin if a parachurch ministry is not strict on the teaching requirement in some settings?

Scott

I agree with all your essay “Not Civil Rights at All.” But you have to agree that no one reads “Green Eggs and Ham” by Dr Seuss as eloquently as the Reverend Jackson. Not even close!

Jerry

“the statutes of Omri are kept”—Micah 6:6
If you let Pete Hegseth go his merry way without WARNING him against IDOLATRY:
then he will be taken in the multitude of his own counselors,
and his blood shall be on your head.
Pete Hegseth is mad at ANTHROPIC for requiring that AI cannot decide to take human lives.
Who is made in the image of God?
Blog and Mablog? are you going to man up and speak against the Statutes of Omri like the prophets of Old?
or are you going to let this nation go the way of Samaria?

Luca

I am working out obedience to Christ in all things and putting pragmatism to death. I’ve spent many years abdicating my responsibility to safeguard my finances but I have forsaken that and am trying to walk in faithfulness now. I have a mortgage and three children that my wife and I are homeschooling. Regarding the tithe, is it pre-tax? Practically, we give about three percent post taxes on my salary and hope to save another 3 percent. There is not much left as my cost of living seems to jump up higher and higher each year. Have I structured my finances incorrectly?
Cheers,

Joe

Chesterton on western board games vs eastern board games.(Chess vs Go game)
Could Chesterton have played the game of GO?
If he could write an essay on the two how would it be?

Kaduka

I’m seeking some clarification on your blog post today titled “Not civil rights at all”
You talk about rights being given to us by our Creator, not government and I understand that you have used this terminology because that’s how the founding fathers wrote of it.
In Australia where I live, we have no Bill of Rights and the right to free speech is a matter in hot contention right now but it is universally understood that whether we have such a right, the government does not recognise it. I agree with you that there are some rights given to us by God, such as the right to life because it is unlawful to murder but other rights that Americans take for granted don’t seem as clear cut, as much as I wish we had those rights (recognised) here.
I hope that the other rights that Americans enjoy are given by God such as free speech, the right to bear arms and many other rights however I don’t know where in Scripture that this would be supported. As an American, perhaps you could say that those are God-given rights by intermingling Romans 13 into your theology but as you said in your blog, this would mean the government could take away those rights, thus rendering them privileges.
Can you point to Scripture or a well thought out book or other resource that would help me to understand which, if any rights are given to us by God and unlawful for governments to restrict or remove?
Thank you

Dave in Australia

I recently read Doug Wilson’s article, The Very First to Be Raised, and I wanted to express my appreciation for it. His emphasis on the chronological force of “first” in Acts 26 and the concrete, bodily nature of the resurrection was clarifying and helpful. It has prompted me to revisit and refine some of my own thinking.
My current framework tends to lean more covenantal and ontological—focusing on resurrection as the inauguration of the age to come and the transformation into imperishable life. Doug’s chronological analysis feels complementary to that approach rather than opposed to it, and I’m grateful for the sharpening.
Where I find myself still working things through is the Transfiguration. Moses and Elijah appear bodily before Jesus and the disciples, and the disciples clearly perceive them as present in a tangible way. At least phenomenologically, it seems as though they are appearing in something akin to resurrection glory prior to Christ’s own resurrection.
I don’t find this destabilizing, but it does raise questions I haven’t fully integrated. If Christ is chronologically the firstfruits of resurrection proper—the first to rise into imperishable life—how should we understand the appearance of Moses and Elijah? Is this best understood as a proleptic glimpse of future glory? A unique revelatory event not tied to resurrection ontology? Or something else entirely?
I suspect part of my difficulty is simply being bound within time, trying to reason about events that reflect God’s action across eternity and history at once. Still, I would be interested to hear how Doug would situate the Transfiguration within the framework he has presented.
Thank you for your time and for the ongoing work.

Tim

“The Very First to be Raised” brings to my mind several verses about what is called “conditional immortality,” verses which are very persuasive to me. (1 Tim. 6:16; Prov. 12:8, and 1 Cor. 15:53-54). All will be raised but then after a period of punishment according to God’s perfect knowledge and justice (perhaps a few years, perhaps millions of years), the unbeliever will experience the second death. What is your view? Thank you.

Elizabeth

RE: The resurrection of the dead.
First of all, Yes and Amen. Maranatha.
My mind frequently goes on rabbit trails, and it did so here: the various platforms that people in our camp have given to Gary DeMar.
Can you give some insight as to why we should give Gary DeMar a platform if he denies the resurrection and the second coming? You draw a clear line with the Ogden guys and I think rightly so, because they are treading on dangerous ground with their perspectives on race. Why not with Gary, who is arguably treading on more dangerous ground?
I imagine there are nuances and an explanation that you could provide and that I am seeing the issue as a black and white issue, where it may not be so. I take my standing as a member of a CREC church as covenantally significant, especially my vow to uphold the church’s purity and peace.
I don’t think I’m alone in seeing if there’s any additional clarity you are willing to give about this. Thanks brother. I really appreciate your work.

JP

Recently I have had a few disconnected interactions with men who refuse to get married “in the eyes of the state.” They are willing to have private ceremonies, but declare that the state is “not to interfere with marriage.” So, they remain unmarried and assume they are doing something bold and good. And also, “since the state has gotten involved with marriage, the state has blown it.” I don’t find anything convincing in their arguments, and really I hear other motivations in their argument like financial advantages and what not. It kind of reminds me of those people who won’t pay taxes or get driver’s licenses and say there is nothing in the law that tells them otherwise.
Anyway, here are my questions:
Since Obergefell, have you seen a rise of more of these ‘anti-state’ attitudes towards marriage among Christians? Could you think of a situation where hiding a marriage from the state would be righteous? (Though not modern—I think of Abraham. And I believe Abraham’s deceptions with Sarah were righteous and faithful, and not cowardly, faithless wobbles.)
Peace,

Charles

Would you administer church discipline to any woman taking the combined oral contraceptive pill based on concerns about its mechanism of action?
If yes, why?
If not, why not?

Luke

My wife’s parents have a mostly dysfunctional marriage. They are believers but their marital life is in shambles. We mostly blame my FIL; he has serious vices which he acknowledges but ultimately has chosen never to control, bad habits that make home life frustrating. MIL plays her role—can be quarrelsome and bitter, which is now practically her default setting toward FIL—but after knowing them closely for 12 years, I think the vast majority of their problems would go away if FIL made a serious effort to change. Divorce has been threatened on both sides many times. They have a church but never pursued close relationships with other believers so have nobody close who can counsel them—they both regularly vent to my wife instead. We’ve learned over the years to not get involved in their disputes and we don’t indulge their “anger of man”—if one starts seriously trashing the other, my wife tells them to stop or she’ll hang up (which sometimes comes to that). But by that same token, we want to embody the spirit of listening exhorted in Scripture and be available for advice/counsel/admonishment should God want to use us for that. When it comes to MIL her frustrations with FIL are often understandable but her handling of it has completely given way to anger of man over the years, and his subsequent displeasure with how she treats him in response is not entirely unwarranted—all things considered making it sometimes feel complicated to find the line between reasonably commiserating, or indulging sinful attitudes. Our marriage is not impacted by this BTW, none of this has ever trickled over into our marriage but it can be stressful and draining to my wife when either parent calls her about their problems and make comments that sound like longing for divorce. Any advice on how we should continue to interact with this part of their lives?

AT

First, let me thank you for years of excellent content and encouragement—the encouragement to stand, to think, to fight when necessary. Since stumbling onto your blog and podcasts for the first time in 2018, your explanations and teachings have challenged, convicted, and strengthened me in the inner man. I have been truly blessed in a multitude of ways by the ministries the Lord has given you.
Obviously that leads to a “but”.
The article “Standing Up to the Evil Rabbit” of February 11th did not come through on my podcast aggregator, so I went and did the old-fashioned thing: read it. Crazy, I know. I could not finish that article, however, because of the picture sampling the debauchery of Bad Bunny’s halftime show.
I am sure that far worse samples could have been found, and the caption that was to the effect of “If you have a problem with this, then something is wrong in your heart” was understandably satirical and mocking those who are trying to give the Rabbit a pass.
Still: was it truly helpful to present that image in that article? I confess that after many years struggling with lust and pornography, I am still very sensitive to even the slightest racy image. It has been just over 20 years, by God’s grace, since I have fallen into that particular habitual sin, and the cluster of sins that go along with it . . . but I also know how easily I (and others) can fall.
Admittedly, I do get over-wrought, and when I can overlook the presentation of such things by others, I try to. But . . . was the snarky comment truly edifying—so much that the portrayal of explicit sin was overcome by the good edification? I think not, but, again, I am a very sensitive brother on this issue. I doubt, though, that I am alone.
Anyway, I am not going to stop reading your articles or listening to you, unless you choose to do a photo review of all the various kinds of sinful malpractice that can occur in our over-sexed society . . . Which I strongly doubt you ever would.
I do offer up that you might think a little more carefully about the weaker brother on these matters—which it really does seem that you do. One time in 8 years of listening and reading seems like a pretty good track record. If only the Super Bowl itself could offer up that kind of care.

Jonathan

About a year ago I wrote to you concerning my father, who decided to leave my mother and abandon the faith. I wrote asking about how I could avoid becoming like him, and your advice to me was much-needed and very fruitful, so I firstly wanted to say thank you.
I’m writing to you again because my sister (I am the oldest son of 6 children) is getting married in a few weeks, and conflict has come up regarding how to balance our duty to continue honoring our father as our father whilst protecting our mother from him and not pretending to be reconciled when we are not. Dad has made it clear that he will not make any scenes, will do as he’s told, won’t withhold funds if not, etc. Currently, the plan is that I will walk her down the aisle, but Dad will still be invited to attend the ceremony. The wedding itself is very much a reenactment of the Gospel in miniature, and we want him to be there and pray that it may be a means of softening his heart.
However, there is disagreement as to whether he should be invited to the reception afterwards. He has made it clear he will come if invited, but will not fuss if not. Our mom has made it clear that, while she will not issue an ultimatum, she does not want him there. She argues that 1) He has refused to apologize to her for his multiple affairs or seek reconciliation with her in any way, 2) She wants to protect us from him, as in help keep us from warming up our relationship too much and pretending we’re reconciled when we are not, and 3) Inviting him to partake in the celebration meal with family and friends (all believers) may violate Ephesians 5:7-8 and 1 Corinthians 5:11. Their divorce (as well as his numerous affairs that lead to it) is known to everyone who will be there, and so his being at the reception would certainly be awkward, to say the least. However, my sister wants him there, arguing that he is still her father, and she “knows [she] will regret it” if he is not there.”
I proposed inviting him to the reception, but without a reserved seat at the family table. He could still come and sit amongst the guests, but frankly the awkwardness of that arrangement would likely result in him deciding not to attend, in a pocket-veto sort of fashion.
Ultimately, the bride and groom will make the final call, but based on what you now know of the situation, what course of action would you suggest? If it were you, would you invite him, either to sit with the family or to sit amongst the guests? Would inviting him violate Eph. 5 and 1 Cor. 5? How should I as the oldest go about talking to my sister and mother about this situation? Thank you for any advice you may give.
God Bless,

JS

I currently serve as a youth pastor at a conservative Bible-believing baptistic-dispensationalist-leaning church in Chicago. But you can count me among the young men in their 20’s who have greatly benefited from your ministry and have become Moscow-Mood-pilled.
One of those resources I benefited from was God Rest Ye Merry. I figured I would send a Hail Mary and see if this ever landed on your desk, but I think the Christian Church would greatly benefit from an Easter equivalent. A jolly-Postmillenial Easter devotional rather than a sad and depressing Lent. I believe your view of Easter and Lent is generally unique in terms of it being a feast time rather than a fasting time. I know you have many books left still being written to quiet the voices in your brain. I truly believe that a Moscow-Mood Easter book would have a long shelf life.
If this somehow lands in your reading list and makes its way into fruition, I will be first in line to read it.
In Christ,

Saolomon

Hello, Pastor Doug! First, I’d like to say how thankful I am for your ministry and for Canon+. My family has benefited greatly from the content. As of this January, a small group of young mothers and I have become our church librarians. Over the past few years we have striven to clean out our library and revitalize it after it became a storage closet and catch-all for several years. We are passionate about having a rich church library and we are excited to officially re-open it this summer for our congregants. At the moment, we are purging books that we do not think will be edifying to the church (mostly Christian romance novels and the occasional heretic). Unfortunately, due to the shear amount of twaddle, we will be left with a library that has shelves only half full. But here’s the exciting part, we can fill them with good and beautiful and true literature! Our budget is tiny, $153, but we have plans to raise funds for the reformation of our library. I have tasked our library committee with asking well-read solid Believers to list their top 5 favorite books in the following categories:
Children’s literature
Men’s literature
Women’s literature
Classic novels
Theology
Christian classics
Since our budget it small, we want to prioritize books that every church library should have, first. I have read through your blog posts that have mentioned some of your favorite books and have added them to our list. You have probably been asked this question so many times I’m sure you have booklists posted somewhere. Could you please assist me by pointing me in the right direction? I would be curious as to Nancy’s recommendations, as well, but I could not find a proper way to contact her. We have never run a library before. We are not lacking in fervor, but we do lack experience, and the years of reading that an older Follower of Jesus would have attained. We would appreciate any wisdom you may share with us. Thank you so much for your time!
Because He first loved us,

Theryne