You Know, Tuesday Letters

Re: Application, Allergies & Anaphylaxis

For the last several years I have noticed concrete applications coming from pulpits where I live becoming as rare as Joe Biden’s moments of lucidity. It seems as though the greatest sin (and perhaps the only remaining sin) is to cause offense to any of the protected classes/genders/sexualities/races/etc. We are being served easy-to-digest and yet unnutritious cheap grace. Sad.

DKH

Re: AAA—so good. Bullseye
While the pansification and irrelevance of the church sinks to new lows. In particular by not living according to what God says men and women and their roles are;
Whoopi Goldberg delivered an unexpected blow to the trans community by clearly articulating that all men are born from a woman.
(Gen 1:27, 1Cor 11:12 albeit leaving out where the woman came from)
“You didn’t get here by yourself, men. You can’t do this without us, and if we don’t let you, you don’t get any. It’s that simple.”
She said this on The View, in an attempt to punish men who voted for another man. The common desire of women, to utilize the people growing equipment within them was not addressed.

Murk

In response to: Application, Allergies, and Anaphylaxis
Summary for those who don’t feel like reading all this or in case of lack of clarity: It’s easy to apply the Scriptures against the enemy’s camp. What happens when you have to land the pastoral plane on traditionally conservative grounds and afflict some comfortable conservatives? Is that not also an application of the text?
Hi Pastor Wilson, It’s me again.
I liked the subject and the intent of this letter, but am curious as to how widely you are going to apply this. Certainly all your conservative friends agree with the idea that more soft-spined preachers refuse to apply things to areas like gender roles, abortion, sexual ethics, feminism and the like.
However, what about failure to apply things that can be the sacred cows of the conservative sphere? For some additional context: My Father is PCA minister and has served faithfully for years. He’s not as satirically biting as the CREC crowd but is most certainly unafraid to preach what the text says to a possibly hostile audience. He has even gone out of his way to test the arbitrary standards of belligerent congregation members. So he’s no lily-livered pulpit prissy.
The church he preached at suffered from a former Reformed preacher who, as I like to call it, refused to take the Sword of the Spirit out of its sheath. He was excellent at espousing precise doctrine, and teaching the congregation the ins and outs of theology, but when it came to what to do with all that doctrine, he was woefully deficient. This was a standard, old school conservative church, very much classic Presbyterian. Enter my father, who proceeds to start “taking the Sword of the Spirit out of its sheath” and showing the congregation what the Scripture says about how they ought to live their lives. This eventually gets him run out of the church.
The applications that he was presenting from the text to the congregation tended not only towards the counter cultural, but that of loving your neighbor. It was the “horizontal love to your neighbor” that the “vertical love to God” commands. The church was very good at stating doctrine bluntly and not moving on doctrinal issues, but being emotionally intelligent, sympathetic, and pastoral? Forget it.
It’s easy to say among conservative circles that liberal preachers are weak, and those things should be said. How quick are you to rebuke those who beat their neighbors over the head with doctrine? The husbands who deal with their wives with an iron fist instead of an open, gentle, hand? Or any other adjacent topics?

Anon

It has recently come to my attention that a very close family member has revealed a very private matter to others in the form of “prayer requests.” Something similar has happened before, and at very high cost to me. When I said something, this relative justified the behavior by claiming to need advice and then demanded I forgive without expecting an apology. As unfair as that felt, I have tried very hard to do so. I have refrained from sharing personal matters since then, but I can’t take back what I’ve already shared. How would you counsel someone in my situation?

Cait

My household subscribes to Canon+ (going on a few years now) and we have grown in knowledge and good works thanks in large part to you and your writings. Suffice it to say, we thank God for you, your ministry, Canon, and the CREC. The question below is not meant to come across as antagonistic or mean-spirited, not at all. It’s a genuine hypothetical that many Christians I know could possibly ask.
I think you and I would both rightly say that we would have preferred the South to win the Civil War. Your book Black and Tan, alongside Pastor Steve Wilkins’ excellent lectures on Canon +, have convinced me of this. But I want to prompt a question I haven’t yet received, but imagine I might in the future.
What would you say if someone asked the following: “Well yes, I do understand the cause of the South, and yes I’ve read Black and Tan, and I’ve listened to all the Steve Wilkins lectures on Canon+, as well as his debate with Rev. Peter Marshall, I understand all that. But Pastor Doug, while you may have the right intentions for fighting this war (or defending it after the fact), and while the cause of the South as you describe it is right and just, there are a few men fighting alongside you who do not share your views. Firstly, some of the men fighting for the South were truly wicked slave owners. They beat their slaves mercilessly and rubbed chili peppers in their wounds. They forbade them from attending church, and in some cases, even raped their wives. Do you realize that if the South won, these men would have rejoiced as they knew that meant it was easier for them to continue in their sin? Secondly, I know R.L. Dabney had some prescient insights regarding feminism and government education, but have you read what he wrote about black people? It’s clear from his writings that he is an unrepentant racist who hates black people in his heart. This man is in Hell, why promote his work at all, let alone while framing him as a Christian brother? And lastly, some prominent men of the South were men like Nathan Bedford Forrest, the founder of the KKK. This seems highly problematic. If the founder of the KKK is part of the same broad group (the South) that you identify with, doesn’t that make you, in some way, supportive of the KKK?”
If someone were to pose that question, how would you respond?

Jacob

Hello Pastor Wilson, a short Q and a long one.
1) What is your favorite edition of Calvin’s Institutes?
2) In a debate between James White and Steve Gregg (who you debated on Calvinism as well), Gregg emphasizes the classic total depravity text that Calvinists appeal to Romans 3, he goes verse by verse demonstrating how the Apostle Paul cites from Psalms, Ecclesiastes and Isaiah showing that there are fools, wicked people, unwise people demonstrating the expansive reach of sin upon every person, but within those same chapters it also speaks of those who are not fools, who do seek God, who do seek truth, who do seek wisdom, ultimately proving says Gregg, that man can seek God. More to this effect in the following long quote:
“If man is created unable to respond or seek God due to our fallen condition, without the regenerating act of God unto faith, it makes numerous verses in the Scriptures where God asks, commands, and encourages man to seek him, troubling. When God instructs or commands man to choose, seek, obey, or find him, is he asking something that is even possible for man? If God commands humans to seek Him, but humans are entirely unable to do so without His regenerating grace, it would seem confusing. If God’s commands are impossible to fulfill due to total inability, some might even argue that it seems to make God deceitful. It would appear as though God is setting a standard that humans cannot meet, only to judge them for failing to meet it. Why would God issue commands that people cannot possibly fulfill? Therefore, it is appropriate to believe God genuinely desires for all to seek him and judges those who choose not to. As observed previously, there are many verses where God asks and desires us to seek him, as well as verses describing those who do seek and choose to put their faith in trust in God as those who are credited and deemed righteous. We understand this by the plain reading of several verses found in both the old and new testaments…
In sum, while the doctrine of Total Depravity correctly teaches the pervasive effects of sin and humanity’s need for divine intervention, it is essential to recognize that God’s grace, through various means provided throughout history, enables individuals to respond positively to Him. That is why it is so important to declare the Gospel and pray for the Holy Spirit to bring conviction on those who do not believe.The innate sense of God’s presence, the law, the Gospel, and the work of the Holy Spirit collectively contribute to our ability to turn towards God, seek Him, and embrace the salvation offered through Jesus Christ.
The many Bible verses asking man to seek God suggest that humans possess certain capacity to respond to divine prompting. As noted, passages such as Deuteronomy 4:29, Isaiah 55:6-7, and Matthew 7:7-8 imply that seeking God is within human ability when pursued with genuine repentance. The universal invitations extended by Jesus and the apostles affirm that the ability to seek and find God is available to all, emphasizing God’s nearness and accessibility to humanity.” As a Calvinist, how would you go about refuting this? Thanks so much and sorry for the long text.

BI

I am writing a senior thesis for school, and I am planning to write about why churches should use wine for communion instead of grape juice. I have a few questions that I would like to get multiple opinions on.
The church I go to uses leavened bread and real wine for communion. We use wine because Jesus definitely drank wine when He instituted the Lord’s supper, not pasteurized grape juice. As far as I can tell, though, Jesus would have eaten unleavened bread at the last supper, because Passover bread was supposed to be unleavened. Is this correct? If so, it seems inconsistent to drink alcoholic wine, but eat leavened bread. Hoping to hear your thoughts on this.
Thank you so much!

Adelle

Have you ever read (or read much about) Timothy Szasz’s “The Myth of Mental Illness: Foundations of a Theory of Personal Conduct”? I finished it this fall, and I thought it might provide good fodder for a No-Quarter November post or book review. The author, a Hungarian-born psychiatrist, explores and exposes some of the creaking timbers, odd historical developments, and conundrums of his chosen profession, particularly in the philosophical and practical ways it diverges from the hard science branches of medicine. Although he professes to be a secularist, he (not unlike a James Lindsay or Abigail Shrier) discerns and diagnoses many of the problematic dynamics in the discipline that is increasingly displacing religion and traditional spirituality and warns against the dangerous of such an approach wed to governmental power and/or the pharmaceutical industry.
I certainly did not agree with him on everything, but I did find much of the material to be intriguing and prescient (even from its initial publication in the 1970s).

Frederick

It’s been a long time, but I wanted to write you to discuss the phenomenon of mostly anons (but not entirely) LARPing as ultra-“based” Nat Socs. In my opinion this has gotten really bad, you are no longer uncle Doug to many if these folks, you are “Rabbi Doug.” The Holden brothers (deeply entrenched in this faction and very friendly with many pastors in the CREC) are putting out Nazi-worshiping content that CREC men and even ministers are supporting! I think you know what time it is, and you are trying to figure out how to stop the bleeding, but the Tobias misadventure set the plans of the righteous back a few steps.
In my opinion, as a close observer and friend of many involved (and an anon myself, as you can see), the camel got his nose under the tent when Canon cozied up to Stephen Wolfe. You all were warned that his podcast co-host, and a man whose work he supported and promoted (“Who is My Neighbor”), Thomas Achord, was on of these very Nat Soc LARPers. I believe you took a wrong turn. The right thing to do at this juncture, in the spirit of No Quarter November, would be to apologize to Alastair Roberts and Brad Littlejohn with no qualifications whatsoever. Admit that you, and the Canon Press team were wrong to bring this evil into your tent, and heartily repent. That would be a blessing to the faithful.
God bless you and your ministry!

Demosthenes

Thank you for your definition of Feminumblum. I am almost 70-years-old and I am not a card-carrying feminist, but I have to admit that in some areas I had acclimatized to the rejiggered world and didn’t even realize it. Years ago I began studying the history of feminism because of what I was seeing around me especially in our churches. 5 years ago I hosted a discussion on feminism in my home and invited women of all ages. It revealed many of the issues you mentioned. Women of the church have bought into the lies—a few leaned toward the “buzz-cut but most wanted to skate a little.” Many of them did view the fact that women had inserted themselves in roles that used to be male only as progress for women. I would love to bring that group back together again today and ask if they understand that their progress of inserting themselves in male only roles has enabled men to argue that they deserve the same—men in women’s sports, locker rooms, bathrooms. Envy works both ways ladies; now they want what you have. So if you wanted to skate a little, why are you surprised by these consequences? God’s design was perfect, is perfect and always will be perfect. It is time to stop fighting it and embrace it.

Trish

I think President Trump took NQN to heart with his cabinet pick announcements. One pattern I see:
Vivek campaigned on using executive power to downsize or dismantle entire departments. Trump: go for it
Elon talked about cutting overall spending in a big way. Trump: go for it
The Fox News guy talked about firing all the woke generals. Trump: you’re now secretary of defense
Representative Gaetz has been subject to an investigative probe that may rival “the treatment ” President Trump himself received; maybe he deserves it but maybe he got it because he actually scared the justice folks. Trump: you’re attorney general now, y’all have fun together
RFK + HHS . . .
So I just realized that all this must be a lead up to picking Douglas Wilson for Secretary of Education. Ready for another confirmation hearing? You may be seen as one of the less controversial choices.

Keith

You may have received this question before, but what cigars do you smoke in the No Quarter November videos? I noticed that you were giving away a box of those cigars for this year’s NQN but I couldn’t find info on what brand and type they are. Are there a few cigars you recommend that you enjoy? I found an interesting post/article about theologians who enjoyed cigars, and the writer took a guess at what you were smoking in one of the NQN videos, here it is in case you are interested.

Austin

I know you are quite the wit, but I constantly find your vocabulary very hard to grasp.
Bronze age—etc. exhausting. Can’t you simple it down for us busy people who work full time and barely have time to read all this without having to reread half a dozen times to figure out what you are saying. Love you Doug! But . . .
“But those who went along with the feminumbulist nonsense, simply because it was widespread and lots of people were doing it now, are the same kind of people who will jump on the Bronze Age bandwagon, just as soon as that becomes popular enough. We have endured a generation of sheeple feminumbulists, and now it looks as though we are going to need to deal with a generation of sheeple misogynists and incels. Overreaction begets overreaction, but sensible people will always lean against the careen.”

David

I have greatly enjoy your ministry, and I’m thankful for your continued faithfulness. I know you have written a book about called Same Sex Mirage, but I have not gotten around to listening to it.
I was not raised in a Christian home, but my neighbors were Christian and I learned about Christ’s redemptive work on the cross from their church. I became apart of their family as the years have gone by, referring to them as my godparent’s (mom and dad) and calling their kids my sisters and brother. Unfortunately, their children have chosen not to follow the Lord and are now living out rebellious lives. In particular, one of them is a part the LGBTQ and will be getting married in this December. None of us knew until recently. So far only my mom was asked to go to the wedding, I believe my dad was not asked. He has been very clear about his beliefs, and my husband and I may or may not be invited. I know Christians shouldn’t attend weddings that don’t honor the Lord. My mom wants to know my thoughts on her attending. What can I say that will be encouragement, but full of truth? I believe she should follow my dad’s leadership in this, but headship and submission in their marriage hasn’t always been in step with the Word. I know I will be disappointed if she decided to go. What are some tips on how to deal with backlash from extended family that will be attending? What are some ways we can show the love of God without forsaking the truth as they will be “married”? Would sending a kind text on the wedding day, giving a gift or a card be in celebration of the union? What should are attitude be towards them? Should we plead with them to repent and believe in Christ and leave this relationship? My husband and I have welcomed our first baby this year and we know we will have to talk to her about this as she gets older. Do you have any tips on teaching kids in this matter? Any boundaries we should have as a family in place to continue to stay faithful to the Lord?
Sincerely,

Nautica

I am writing to inquire if you have any flamethrower-related college scholarships or grants.
My name is Elliot and I am a high school sophomore currently enrolled at Oklahoma Christian University as a concurrent student with a 4.0 GPA and 24 college credits to date. I hope to graduate high school with half of my mechanical engineering degree and finish the entire degree by the end of my sophomore year of college (with a possible year added for a master’s degree).
My dad and I enjoy listening to your Blog & Mablog podcast as well as several of your other works. Last November, my dad showed me your NQN video, and I immediately wanted to hold 10 lbs of explosive fuel on my back, shoot it through a tube, and light things on fire with it. So, eight months (and several exciting tests) later, I had personally designed and built from scratch a fully functioning flamethrower. All that was left to do was to test it . . .
If you have any questions or would like documentation (resume, transcript, pictures of the flamethrower, etc.), please let me know.
Thank you for your consideration.
Yours Sincerely,

E.L.G.

What do you see as the next step in America’s devolution into sexual deviance? Bestiality? Pedophilia? Something else? I believe it will be some form of pedophilia because of the way children’s “gender transitioning” has gone in relation to the conversation around bodily autonomy. If a child can choose to change his gender, as they’ll argue, then why could they not consent to sexual relations? May God help us before we reach that point!

Caleb

Pastor Wilson, considering NQN and Moscow’s growing cultural presence, it seems to me that you are entering some sort of “celebrity pastor” status. Are my observations correct? If they are correct, how do you keep the “fame” from going to your head?
Thanks,

Brandon

When we’re forced to use the LGBTQ+ acronym, my husband and I like to add LSMFT for good measure. It’s a favorite acronym from our 1950s childhood—Lucky Strike Means Fine Tobacco.

Carole

A couple thoughts for “L” on when to commence chastening: first, God’s Word in Proverbs 13:24 says we should chasten “betimes,” which has the meaning of “with the dawn.”
Second, an analogy: if you were required to divert the course of a river, would you rather try it downstream where the current is strong, or at the headwaters where it’s a trickle?
Both suggest chastising as soon as the need for chastising presents itself in a child’s behavior and before the self-will or resistance, etc., becomes habituated. No need to wait for some arbitrary date on the calendar.

Mr & Mrs B

I am trying to get a variety of opinions regarding my MDiv Education. Here is the situation. I have been a Reformed Presbyterian for two years after growing up Dispensational Baptist. I am fully Postmillennial, and hold to the WCF (though I have much to learn still) I am currently at a school whose Bible Department would be best described as halfway between Progressive Dispensational and Reformed Baptist. I chose this school before I had fully gone Reformed, due to its solid conservative values, dual-enrollment options, and Five-Year Accelerated MDiv (cut to four for me due to homeschool dual-enrollment). I am in my last year of undergrad Bible School and will enter our MDiv program in the fall. I currently attend an EPC Church which is pretty solid. I don’t like the EPC as a whole, but my pastor is solid (not quite as Reformed as I would like, i.e. family worship, patriarchy, sphere sovereignty, etc. but a good man nonetheless).
With all of that said, here is my situation. I am trying to discern whether or not this school will be most suitable to equip me for a Reformed ministry. Would it be better for me to go to a place like Covenant or RTS? My pastor seems to think that my school will be just fine, especially given that I would be able to be involved in ministry training at this church for two years. Part of me loves that idea. The other part of me is hungry for a classical education as I assume the MDiv at Greyfriars will provide. Will folks educated at Greyfriars only have opportunities at CREC churches? Don’t get me wrong, I love the CREC (by far the most vibrant churches I have ever attended), but I am not sure if that is where I want to start out.
I would greatly appreciate some insight into my education. What will equip me best? Am I stunting my growth staying here? Should I go to Covenant or NSA instead?
Thanks, appreciate all you do

Isaac

Generally speaking, I believe any/all issues related to a particular member of the church, or an issue related to one of the church’s ministries, should be shared among *all* the Elders and discussed to determine next steps. My question is, do you believe there is ever an appropriate time–when a particular issue may arise that one Elder becomes aware of—for an Elder to work to resolve an issue w/o bringing it to the attention of the other Elders? To put it another way, is there ever an appropriate time when a member may request “confidentiality” w/ one Elder, to get advice/wisdom/instruction/etc., and the Elder honors the request by not bringing it the attention of the other Elders (unless escalation is necessary)? Thank you!

Ben

In the movie Patriot, when Mel Gibson’s character was pursuing the British soldiers that murdered his son and burned down his farm, he instructed his two other sons, as they prepared to ambush those same British soldiers, to “aim small, miss small.” The phrase has been used by hunters and military snipers, the logic being that if you aim at a small target, even if you miss it exactly, you still hit the larger target.
I’ve decided to employ that idea in trying to convince the leadership of my local church to likewise narrow their aim toward Christian localism. Mustard seeds and yeast are not spectacular but they achieve their goal.

Tony

If Christians are allowed to eat pork, why does Isaiah 66:17 speak of the destruction of those who eat pig’s flesh?

Andrew

Please pass my compliments to the team at Canon Press for the Mr. Rogers Neighborhood NQN theme. The details in the trailer were hilarious and amazing
Your post on Wimpathy convicted me greatly and I have an upcoming opportunity this Christmas season to repent but I don’t know how to be faithful while not turning a family gathering into a conflagration. My wife, baby daughter, and I are planning to drive 550 miles to spend Christmas with my immediate family to honor my parents. I grew up in a secular humanist household with a nominal Catholic veneer and one of my family’s dominant sins is conflict avoidance. We let conflicts multiply rather than address them and when they finally fester to the surface, we fight poorly (wrath and strife abound). My father has been an alcoholic since I was 11 (I’m 37 now). My mom is an ardent feminist who is pro-sodomy and infanticide. My sister is even further left than my mom and my brother and his wife are socially libertarian. I’m the only Christian. Discussing any topic of substance like religion or politics is taboo except for my sister who is evangelistic in her leftist religion and no one challenged her until my wife did one year. My mom is rather skilled in cutting anyone down to size with her tongue when someone gets out of line. I talked about the atonement with my dad over the phone and in person. I’ve never directly addressed his drinking problem. Others have tried and failed, but he’s killing his heart and liver. During my wedding over two years ago, I told them the gospel behind the cover of a wedding speech where I knew they couldn’t throw rocks at me. No one reacted. So my question is what advice do you have to offer to share God’s truth and grace during Christmas time with my parents, brother, sister and sister in law? Thank you.
Sincerely,

Bren

I hope you are doing well. I don’t want to take a lot of your time but I wanted to get your opinion on something. Should a 19 yr. old who still lives at home be required to go to church with their parents or if the father allowed it, is it ok for him to go to another church (Bible centered church)? Thank you for your time.

Chris

I am fairly certain there were shenanigans in the 2020 election, and indeed, probably in most elections. But to make this post with no mention of COVID and all its effects on turnout totals, primarily via massive increases in mail-in voting, seems like a crucial missing qualification.
Yes, yes, you might dismiss those as “harvested” or what-have-you, but that only quibbles with the honesty of the mail-in-turnout-boosts. What is necessary when making dark insinuations about the turnout comparisons is acknowledgment of the raw fact of all those extra millions of mail-in ballots in 2020.

HW

First, props to you to make note of the scaling of the first image you showed. How you scale date matters in a huge way. But a small footnote in your chart says, “Nate Silver projects Kamala to end up with 76M and Trump 78M, so nudge the last two bars up a little.”
Without those included in the graph, your graph no longer communicates what you think it does. John Kerry got 59M votes in 2004 and Obama got 69M four years later, a 10M difference. Obama then dropped 8M votes going to the 2012 election. So this is a normal range of voting swing. Biden got (alleged in your words) 81M in 2020 and Kamala will get 76M in 2024, a decrease of 4M. This seems entirely plausible. I’m no Joe Biden fan, but I think it’s easy to imagine how millions of Americans (wrongly) wanted to oust the present leader in the middle of COVID. They had extra time on their hands because everyone was stuck at home. So more people voted in total and they (wrongly in my mind) decided to get rid of the person presiding over COVID. It’s not that hard to imagine. This chart is not the smoking gun you think it is.
Let’s look at this another way. Trump got 63M votes in 2016 and 74M votes in 2020, which is a 17% increase. Hilary got 66M in 2016 and Biden got 81M in 2020, a 22% increase. Both Biden and Trump massively increased turnout in 2020. Can I believe that Biden increased more votes by percentage more than Trump because he wasn’t shrill, crooked Hillary to the tune of 5% better? For sure that seems plausible.
Also, I don’t buy the 2020 election was rigged for the same reason I don’t believe most conspiracy theories. To pull off a heist of this magnitude you need a massive number of people in cahoots to rig ballots, and I don’t believe a group of that magnitude can keep something like that quiet. Trump tried to run this through the courts in late 2020 and early 2021. The entire Republican establishment has months to bring something compelling to the table, and they brought nothing. And no whistleblowers in 4 years? I don’t buy it.

Roger