Last Letters Before October Hits

Thank you for doing the debate. It has hard to endure that much of an abolitionist of absolute certitude, but it had to be done.
It seems to me his argument is that since we don’t pass abolition bills, all this bad stuff (God’s judgment) is happening in our country. If we just passed abolition bills (even though zero chance of becoming laws—for most Americans holding the woman legally liable for killing her baby is inconceivable) then God would bless our country and bad stuff would stop happening, or something like that.
You’re right, it will take revival, renewal, restoration, and reformation (my Four R’s) for abolition to one day become the law of the land, and I pray for that often. Thanks again.

Mike

Pastor Wilson,
First, praise God for your faithfulness to the cause of Christ! I recently watched your conversation with Russell Hunter on the topic of abortion abolition and read your follow up post “Smashmouth Rising”. I believe this discussion has broader implications beyond the topic of abortion and also applies to how Christians ought to engage with politics in general.
Fisher Ames once said, “[Politics] cannot have fixed principles, from which a wise man would never swerve, unless the inconstancy of men’s view of interest and the capriciousness of the tempers could be fixed.”
Case in point, I don’t think many would disagree that a Trump administration would present more opportunities for Christians than a Harris administration. So is compromise the price we pay for a seat at the table?
I struggle that on one hand, it appears necessary to sometimes compromise on biblical principles (such as the complete abolition of abortion) in order to maintain influence in politics, while on the other hand, I sympathize with Russell’s point that Scripture doesn’t seem to allow for any compromise on major moral issues.
While I appreciate your point that many Godly men in Scripture were compromised, it doesn’t seem that God portrayed that compromise as good or acceptable “for the greater good.”
So, here is my primary question: How would you respond to Russell’s interpretation of Isaiah 30? In that passage, God condemns Israel for pragmatically running to Egypt after he explicitly told them never to return there (Deut. 17:16). Israel is accused of making a plan that is not God’s plan and adding sin to sin instead of remaining completely faithful and trusting the outcome to him.
Thank you for your time and for your continued commitment to speaking the truth. I’m grateful for your insight and I look forward to your response.
In Christ,

Caleb

I commend you for your patience and generosity towards our brother T. Russell Hunter, for I likely would not have the same patience and do not believe that he is treating you with any shred of understanding or the same generosity as he should a brother in Christ.
As another comment remarks, his argument boils down to “YOU aren’t allowed to define incrementalism as being a consequence of being finite; I get to define it as you wanting to write unjust laws.” He conflates your brand of incrementalism with the establishment who doesn’t want to change the status quo, then insists that you cannot conflate him with bad abolitionists. Completely dishonest behavior—and in the same vein, I argue, as the Pharisees condemning Jesus when he was doing works on the Sabbath.
He also completely misrepresents the civic institutions of our country against the direct theocracy of ancient Israel. We both want Abolitionist policies, but those policies can only be put into effect by willing legislatures—legislatures that Abolitionists are not putting forward for us to vote for while the majority are under the Status Quo Establishment. Russell also wants to argue for the federal government to overstep its boundaries for a federal ban that would be just as fragile as Roe proved to be and would just result in more dead babies when the next Democrat gets in.
It’s all well and good for Russell to claim his own righteousness in following the Word of God while offering no further solution than to sit on our hands and complain that everyone else isn’t and taking pot shots and interrupting you rudely in debate—and he thereby judges the hearts of men beyond his own.
Again, I commend your patience, Pastor Doug, even if I feel you could have presented a stronger case in the debate. While I love my Abolitionist brothers and agree strongly with them, I have harsh words for their self-righteous attitudes.
Yours in Christ,

George

You debated the abolition guy recently. He strongly disagreed with you, but he wasn’t repulsive. Pardon my lack of ability to express what I’m getting at. But some of the other guys you interacted with were a little effeminate (the concern bros that have a problem with the Moscow mood). Maybe effeminate is too strong a term, but these guys use the term “brother” a lot; and apart from that, I can’t put my finger on what it is about those guys that is so off putting. Calvin I think said something along the lines of “blandishments of speech, by lightness of gesture and apparel, and other allurements.” That’s true of effeminate men, but you can’t quite say it of these concern bros even though they still give those vibes.
Can you help my groanings and help me put a finger on it? And what exactly should we teach our sons so that they develop a strong backbone but don’t exude such kind of feminine energy? I can show my son both videos, and say “be like this and not like this guy.” But apart from that, how do I break it down for him, so he knows what I’m talking about.
Thanks,

Peter

In regards to your discussions with abolitionists, would you say that they are not seeing the problem in the trolly problem? It’s sounds like they think it is wrong for a governor to sign an incrementalist bill even if it is the only one on the table. If the governor does nothing the trolly keeps on moving killing more and promoting more injustices and showing more partiality than it otherwise would if he would have signed the bill and pulled the lever to the incrementalist’s track. It seems that they take the lack of action as a lack of responsibility. Would you agree?
Also I think Esther is a great example of biblical smash mouth incrementalism. Abolitionists would have settled for nothing less than revoking the king’s prior command, but she and Mordecai incrementally allow the Jews to defend themselves then smash mouth with a second edict giving them an extra day to go on offense.

Stephen

I appreciated the discussion between you and Russell. You two danced around the following summary many, many times.
Doug: “If I was governor, I would sign a heartbeat bill.”
Russell: “That writes wickedness into the law which is itself wicked.”
Doug: “I would state explicitly in my signing that the end goal is abolition and do everything I can to pressure that bill to get to my desk.”
Russell: “Doesn’t matter. It still writes wickedness into the law regardless of your intentions.”
I find Russell’s argument compelling, but it ultimately breaks down in the following situation. Let’s say you were the governor of the purple state of Virginia. Abortion is currently legal in Virginia through the second trimester (26 weeks). A heartbeat bill lands on your desk. If you sign the bill, it allows for abortion before 6 weeks, but is banned afterwards. If you veto the bill, the status quo remains and abortion is allowed before 26 weeks. Either way, you are writing some amount of evil into the law. In Russell’s way of framing the discussion, you’ve committed wickedness of you sign the law or veto the law. You’ve sinned either way. What would Russell do in this situation? He can’t answer that because his argument doesn’t acknowledge this reality, which is very much in play in our current political environment. You slightly pushed on this once in your discussion, but I wish you would have hammered it home way more because it really makes the case for smashmouth incrementalism.
Russell could say, “I would tell the legislature to not send me a bill unless it was an abolitionist bill.” But that’s a cop-out. What if they send a heartbeat bill anyway. You have to choose. This is what governors in purple and red states are having to choose right now. It’s not a hypothetical. Which why I ultimately agree with your take.
Tell the truth. Abortion is wicked at all stages. Go for everything you can get. Accept what you can without settling.
Best,

Roger

I am writing as a pastor seeking pastoral wisdom on a unique situation that I am hoping a seasoned pastor such as yourself may be able to speak into. Your insights have been consistently useful in my life and ministry. So, first of all, thank you for your ministry!
Here is my situation: I have a special needs son who creates problems in the Lord’s Day assembly. He has a processing disorder that limits his understanding of cause and effect (as well as consequences and punishments). Though he is 15, his reasoning is similar to that of a toddler, leading to indignation that he believes is righteous but is not in keeping with reality. He will shout angrily at strangers and small children and, at times, hits children (usually his younger sisters). By God’s grace, our church family sees through all this and loves him in spite of it. I believe that God has used my son’s mental disabilities as a tool of sanctification in both my family and my church.
However, he is often so disruptive and violent that we have to take him home (or leave him home) from church. He can safely stay home alone for short periods as we monitor with our security cameras. I believe firmly in the duty of believers to attend the assembly (Hebrews 10:23-25). Even young children remain a part of our assembly. I am wrestling with what to do with Micah. I’m supplementing Scripture, catechism, and prayer individually with him at home, something he responds to well. He loves the Lord and is a baptized, believing child of God.
What should I do regarding my son’s inability to safely attend church? Currently, I’m putting him in the category of an Alzheimer’s patient who becomes violent in his misunderstanding and functions as a shut-in. It is the best thing I know to do. However, I would welcome counsel from you. If there is a means whereby I can safely have him in the assembly, I would love to have ideas (I’ve exhausted many). If keeping him home is reasonable in these circumstances, I would love suggestions on keeping him spiritually nourished.
Thank you for your ministry, brother.
Blessings in Christ,

Daniel

Do you have any recommendations for reading on textual criticism and the origins of the (NT especially) canon? I recently listened to a liberal/unbelieving perspective and it made me realize how woefully uneducated I am in this area.

Reagan

I finally watched the New Saint Andrews College advertisement with the ‘birdie flip’ to see what is causing all the stir.
My critique is that it starts out with selling its product while conveying a masculine spiritual bravado that is refreshing, up to the point of the gesture.
John Calvin’s quote: “The human heart is a perpetual idol factory.”—gives me pause in being able to fully appreciate the ad.
Johnny Cash’s (image) contribution to the ad, of telling idols off, seems flagrantly senseless unless idols are mostly physical and erected in the city square. I think it conveys a falsehood, which is that “idols” aren’t mainly a matter of the heart and subject to the Holy Spirit’s devices—or ways for convicting our consciences so that we repent and surrender ‘that idol.’
The advertisement rings of pop culture mixed with Christian bravado, and seems to be most successful as an overture to a long debate.
In my opinion

J

Okay, so I haven’t swung by Blog and Mablog in a while, and when I did, I encountered the ongoing flap about the middle finger ad. I hunted down the ad, watched it (definitely some Streisand Effect in play), and then wondered what the big deal was. I thought the meaning was pretty clear about repudiating idolatry in a way that didn’t allow any room for qualification or retraction. It seems to me that we need a lot more of the sort of people who do just that. So, “te absolvo,” and carry on. I’ll check back with you next time you slap another yellow jacket nest.

Bro Steve

Your words have deeply blessed and encouraged me, so I want to bless and encourage you in return. Keep up the good work!
Recently, I have had to deep clean my house because of some tiny uninvited guests. I ignored them for a while, but it got to the point where they were taking over the place. Now, every time I see one of these insects, I kill it. It is the only way to be free of the problem.
There are a lot of sin issues that seem small at first—left unattended they become disasters. It has made me reconsider the “small” sins in my life—my fears and pessimism. If I let them sprout, they almost always become bigger sins. God can work miracles. God can do anything; God loves me and he will take care of me. How can I doubt His goodness?
To anyone struggling with this issue, do not give in to despair. Be diligent to squash those fears when they appear.

AW

I have struggled to understand what God wants me to be doing as a single, middle-aged woman.
In your FAQ, you wrote “Complementarians want to honor the teaching of Scripture on submission, but they tend to restrict that understanding to keeping women out of the pulpits of churches, and by teaching male headship in the home. But arguing for patriarchy means an understanding that nature itself teaches us that male leadership is to be more extensive than that, and in healthy societies ‘father rule’ will be seen across the board.” But elsewhere you discuss women aren’t submissive to all men, but particularly to their husbands or fathers. If men are to be the leaders and teachers, why stop at political leaders? I own a small business, but if 1 Tim. 2:12 applies to society writ large, it seemed to me I couldn’t hire male employees and supervise them. I’m not a great business owner, but if I couldn’t supervise men, was it wrong for me to work under a woman who was supervising men? Was that supporting her in her wrongdoing? I also wondered, if I shouldn’t teach the Bible from the pulpit, why was it ok to teach history from a lectern, or publish a novel or a thought-provoking piece of art?
It has been very difficult living in this little box I seem to have put myself in. I want to get out of it.
Thank you for your time and thoughts.

Caroline

In the spirit of seizing back editorial control of the dictionary, I have a question regarding saints. I’m comfortable referring to the biblical writers as St. Paul or St. Peter, and great saints of old as St. Augustine or St. Basil. But my issue is this: all these saints have been formally declared so by the Roman Catholic Church. What about saints (as in, those remarkable Christians who have died and are now with the Lord) that have not been recognized as saints by the RCC? If our side of the river wants to drive the narrative and not rely on Rome to tell us who and who is not a saint, shouldn’t we be referring to King Alfred as St. Alfred the Great, or John Calvin as St. John Calvin, or General Stonewall Jackson as St. Stonewall? This may seem relatively minor, but if a Roman Catholic were to ask me why everyone I call “saint” has also, coincidentally, been formally declared to be one by the RCC, I would be hard pressed to answer. It seems to me we should just refer to all great, old, deceased Christian’s as “saint so and so” and pay no mind to what Rome thinks about it. Am I on to something, or have I lost the plot?

Jacob

This is regarding your latest episode ‘Elections as a Death Match.’ You’ve said many times if elected Trump shouldn’t prosecute his enemies. I’ve agreed with you up until recently on this point. I don’t think he should go after them as retaliation but rather because they are committing treason and should be prosecuted. Because they have been getting away with it since the Nixon days you mentioned, proves they just keep leveling it up and here we are today. At the scale they are full out destroying our nation by dismantling our Constitution that separates our country as unique and it’s own. CC has had to fight legally against its constitutional rights being violated by MPD, why cannot our nation fight back legally? This is not about retaliation, but rather the ruling powers bearing the sword the Lord has given them to destroy evil. Anything less is, as we are watching, simply tolerating evil when it is in our power to stand firm against it.
You advocate everyone voting to exercise their rights as Americans in this time the Lord has put us in. I am coming to believe that that must include the ruling powers also using their rights under the law to exercise justice to defend good. I mean, they can, why shouldn’t they? Wouldn’t that just be abdicating their role God has put them in to do anything less? Would you excuse a father not punishing a son who grossly broke the home rules to the point of destroying the home? Again, this is not about retaliation. This is about, God has put people in the roles He wants them for His purpose. He gave the government the role of holding back evil and bearing the sword. Abdicating US government leaders is not what we need more of. We call for men to men in the home, why not leaders in defense of our Constitution? Final point, treason (not necessarily fraud or other gray zones) should be tried and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Enough is enough.
Thank you for you time and work. Blessings!

Katherine

I happened upon one of your sermons while I was battling Vagus Nerve Damage. I would be awake every single morning by 3 am, stuck in fight or flight, waiting to find out if I was gonna have a bowel movement or if I was gonna have another “vagus nerve attack” which sends me to the ER.
Every morning at 3:15 am, without fail, i was usually awake for the day. At this point I was in a deep depression, my only therapy at that time being ‘sh*tposting’ on Facebook, because after two failed attempts to talk to the VA psych docs failed me as much as my primary care physician. They were really just overburdened and i wasn’t loud enough to get proper attention.
In my own therapy of just learning anything I could learn, i found myself playing with Gnosticism, but I had been an atheist at this time for the last 25-30yrs.
There’s gonna be a lot of missing details, and I’m sorry for that.
I liked Gnosticism after first ‘shrooms’ to help with brainfog and depression, then nearly dying in the ER when the doctors overdosed me on ketamine.
After those, it no longer felt like the end was nothingness . . . and I’m not gonna lie, after 2 years of being in the ER every other weekend with the worst pain in my life, I wanted that black nothingness. I began to feel unconvinced that there was nothing after . . . I started to actually worry that there was something after. During this time, I was very malnourished from days without eating, having maybe 4 meals in 3 weeks. I started to look for gods to give me the total death I wanted. I had enough of my sanity that I didn’t stick with anything, but each morning i would again start wondering, begging in my mind for an end. I wasn’t suicidal in the modern sense, but in a classical sense. I wanted to be useful in a trade for total death.
A sh*tposting friend of mine had suggested a sermon from you . . . he’s a Christian of sorts, but we’re both semi conservative . . . so we mostly got along when he wasn’t telling me I was going to Hell. I don’t remember which sermon, sadly my memory isn’t as good as it was prior to 2020, but I remember the feeling. Like I was listening to someone’s grandfather that actually cared. I was raised by a fatherless father to be my father’s son, but thanks to hard lessons, and some of your sermons, I’m slowly getting to the point I should’ve been years ago.
I can’t swear I’m where I should be in my belief . . . I struggle with the idea of faith, and most of it is just faking it until I’m useful. I pray with nothing but doubt and I don’t know how to stop that. My prayers are for others and for understanding, and I just feel ridiculous.
I’m not sure what to do . . . so i wanted to thank you. You gave me something to try to figure out, and it has made my life better, and I’m constantly trying to pass my understandings to my daughter and wife.
But I’m so full of doubt, and somehow a disconnected peace and i don’t understand what I’m supposed to do. I tried volunteering, helped a guy fix his house so he wouldn’t get evicted, and I thought i found my passion. Sadly, the libertarian party (whose members were how i found out about him) split with me over my sh*tposting, and wouldn’t help me find anymore volunteering opportunities. So I started just cleaning up road litter for hours at a time, then my heath limited that. Then when I had to take over homeschooling my daughter, my time got even more limited, and I started to lose hope in finding a path.
I just don’t know what to do . . . any advice for any part of my issues is welcome but not expected.
Mostly, I just want to thank you for your words . . . thank you for making them available alongside the verses. Thank you for elaborating them in a way I could understand. The idea of being useful through god is all I want now.
Again thank you . . . and thank god for my Hell . . . I just want a direction now.

NP

Grateful for your life and work, getting straight to the question.
In the aftermath of David’s sin, the death of his son with Bathsheba often raises questions about her role in the narrative. Bathsheba endured immense suffering, facing the painful realities of childbirth and the loss of her child. It’s worth considering whether her compliance with David stemmed from the oppressive power dynamics of her time. Given the possible societal belief in “Rex non potest,” she may have felt compelled to obey, fearing for her life if she resisted.
It’s difficult to reconcile the profound grief Bathsheba experienced with the idea of a just God. Could the loss of her child also be seen as a consequence of her own sin? This depth of sorrow challenges my understanding of divine justice and compassion. Ultimately, how do we make sense of Bathsheba’s suffering in the context of her actions and the circumstances surrounding them?

Sarah

Early this year, I felt a strong pull to (someday) start a small, indie publishing company. The primary reason I had this desire is because some great men in my life (pastors) have written some great works, but they were either self-published or now out of print.
Of course, there’s always great options for printing classic works in the public domain, which I’ve had the desire to do (more obscure theological works especially).
My question is, where did you start when creating Canon Press? I’ve heard some of the stories of it starting in your living room, but if you were able to tell your past self right now what he would need to do to get a solid start (and do it right), what would that be?

Ben

Is there a good hymn book for family worship with little children that you’d recommend? Extra points if it’s got psalms too. We’ve been using Tiny Hands Hymns by Hannah Estes and we’re beginning to outgrow it. Thanks in advance for your help!
In Christ,

Isaac

I would first like to thank you for your consistent response to almost any letter I send in. You always seem to treat them fairly, and I try my best to come with concerns and in good faith, as an ally not as an adversary.
Let me offer up another question though. I stumbled across your talk titled “The Lost Virtues of Sexism” on YouTube when I was first getting into Canon Press’s and Moscow’s content, and I must admit I’m having a hard time seeing the wisdom in titling a talk that. Now, I’m absolutely with you when it comes to gender roles and the proper orientations of both genders, there’s no dispute there.
My primary question is, is it not oxymoronic to call sexism virtuous? Sexism, even according to the Oxford Dictionary, is known as “prejudice, discrimination, stereotyping . . . on the basis of gender.” The Bible commands us to be impartial, so therefore sexism cannot be virtuous. Is it not a 3CV to call the biblical gender roles partial in the unrighteous sense? If anything, the culture is the sexist establishment, and biblical gender roles (when properly applied), are the truly virtuous kind. Which leads into my next question about the Serrated Edge in general.
What’s the point of putting such a needlessly (at least in my view) inflammatory title to the talk? Especially since you spent a decent portion of the first part of the talk defining your terms? You wouldn’t have had to if you had simply titled it, “The Lost Virtues of Biblical Gender” though I realize that doesn’t roll off the tongue quite as well. I realize this talk is a few years old, so forgive me for bringing up what I’m sure is old hat.
You talk often about preaching a hot gospel, and I heartily concur. However, you seem to throw some gasoline on that burning word every now and then. This is also coming from someone who doesn’t mind bad language (and doesn’t have as much of a problem with the Jolly Roger you’ve recently become so famous for), being used to make a point in a wise manner. Do you think that the gospel needs any help from us to be hot?
May God increase your hunger and thirst for righteousness.

Kenneth

My brother and I are both huge fans of your content. We watch you on YouTube, we read this blog and your published books, and we subscribe to Canon Plus. We even considered going to your university in Idaho. All of that to say, we greatly admire you.
The reason I am writing is because I hoped for you to address male friendships. You’ve spoken extensively and wisely towards male/female relationships, but I am wondering what it looks like to be a man surrounded by other men. Say for example, being too emotional and needy with your wife makes her a lesbian, but among guy friends, what do support structures look like? I have always valued older men in the church as mentors, but I find myself asking this question.
I would love to hear your thoughts or otherwise be redirected to an earlier sermon or book!
Thank you,

Isaac

After reading a letter sent to you from Taylor about Law School, I was finally prompted to write and ask this question.
My homeschooled son is a senior in high school. He hasn’t really liked school all that much, and has always said he doesn’t want to go to college. Unfortunately, as he’s gotten older, I don’t see him as a trade school kind of guy. He’s more of a thinker. In fact, I think the reason why he doesn’t like school is he needed to be challenged by and with other students (it’s part of the drawback of homeschooling, but here in California, we had no other choice. Even the Christian schools are a little light in the loafers in these parts). He’s actually smart and has a good head on his shoulders. So in doing a little research on potential careers (outside of music—he’s a talented pianist), it turns out he has a heavy interest in law. As his father who knows him that made sense to me.
The question is, now what? I’m afraid of sending him to a law school like the ones Taylor mentioned. I fear there’s a dearth of law schools that aren’t, well, communist. It seems like we need Christian lawyers but law is taught without the necessary foundation these days. Any advice on pursuing a law degree as a Christian? Any chance that “pot on the stove” you mentioned would be ready to serve in about five years?

Ryan

My favorite OT book, besides Psalms and Proverbs, is Isaiah; however, I don’t know of any commentary from a postmil perspective. I have Young. I’m not looking for seminary level but I’ll take what I can get. Help, anyone?

David

You might appreciate the overlap here. Thanks for your work,

Gordon

What do you think of believers making the sign of the cross? Or crossing oneself as some call it? Do you think folks should do it, have you ever done it?

Eric

I’m a single father and have a question. Would it be appropriate to dress my 2-year-old son in a shirt, shoes and diaper for church? Thank you.

Andrew

Earlier in the year, you said in response to a question on your blog that, “The issue is not what God can do with His own words, as He did with Phillip’s daughters. The issue is what we must do with God’s words if we genuinely believe them to be such. We should act like we believe it.”
I wonder why you seem to hold modern day proponents of prophecy to a higher standard than that of the disciples of Jesus who were physically with Him during His earthly ministry. They did not write down and record every last word that they physically heard Jesus speak. And particularly Matthew and John, when they wrote their Gospels, they through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit left out certain things that they likely heard Jesus say. Of course it was stuff that was surely not as “important” . . . say, jokes Jesus made, or Jesus’ favorite meal that Mary would cook, or His favorite memory from growing up with Joseph. Or what about His best injury story that left a scar? You get the point.
If you say modern day prophets must record every word spoken by God and treat it like “Bible” and “like they believe it,” why didn’t the apostles do that? Or do you think they actually did write down every word they heard Jesus speak?

J

I am a nurse practitioner and currently work for a large corporation. A sizable portion of my patient load is insured by Medicare.
Technically I work for a private company, but if my paychecks are by and large funded by tax payer dollars (Social Security), am I essentially a government employee?
I don’t want to be contributing to a system that is wrongfully taking the responsibility of health and welfare away from the family government and placing it squarely on the shoulders of the federal government. What should healthcare workers do about this? Seems like other than concierge care models, everyone is seeing Medicare patients . . . and if there were massive shifts in where health care providers worked that didn’t take Medicare, it would cause huge shortages and lots of elderly people may have difficulty finding care. Our health care system is a mess . . .
Thanks for the work you’ve done and courage you have shown in speaking to issues in healthcare. I sadly did not do a good job during all the COVID madness. I took the jab honestly just because I had been conditioned all my life to take vaccines and in general “trust the experts” even though I’m supposed to be one…
Going to public school you have to have all the shots and then in nursing school even more are required and if you work in a hospital you have to get some annually as well like the flu shot. And if you say no to the flu shot then at least where I worked they made you wear a mask 6 months out of the year for “your own protection.” The mask always seemed like a weapon to me that they used to force compliance. So when COVID came around it really didn’t seem like a big deal to me to take another vaccine. But taking the shot and then being forced to wear masks for multiple years at work and then being strongly encouraged to wear a mask even at church was too much for me. I say all this and I’m not anti-vaccine.
Now my company is incorporating “pronoun sensitivity” in some of the training materials and I’m just amazed that medical doctors and nurses are going along with this transgender insanity.
Overall I don’t feel like I am compromising my beliefs at work. I have to do the trainings but I don’t have to sign anything pledging my allegiance to all the wokery. I get to share the gospel frequently with people who are suffering and lost. One time I even stood up to an older man who was coming in seeking a Viagra prescription in order to sleep around while his wife was sick. I also had an opportunity to tell the truth to a woman who was considering transition surgery to remove her breasts. That day I thought I was for sure going to get fired. But I’ve resolved that I am willing to lose my job any day of the week if the options are between being a compromised Christian with a job and a jobless Christian with a clear conscience.
Just like in Luke 3:10-14 where the crowds, the tax collectors, and the soldiers asked “what should we do?”
What should health care workers do? Specifically healthcare providers like MDs, DOs, PAs, and NPs.

Anon

I’m the gent you addressed in your letter titled “Hard Times Ahead.” Thank you for your follow up letter and the counsel in it. I repented of the bitterness with which I wrote the letter. And I will surely try and do better to stay silent, instead of writing or speaking, when pissed off. It’s a principle I know quite well, but like Paul I sometimes find myself doing things I don’t want to do. This was one of those times. But, again, I’m sorry and grateful for you response. Now, I understand why you would think that I believe women are the enemy. I should have explained myself better, but I clearly was writing when I shouldn’t have been—I don’t think women are the enemy or primarily at fault; the fathers and husbands and pastors are. But that said, you know better than anyone here that generalisations are not bad but indeed a necessity. I still hold to the position that modern women do not bring much to the table. I have read all your books, I think, and I don’t remember you talking much about what a woman bring to the table. I will however go and reread what you recommended. That said, let me calmly try and make the points that I was making—this time, hopefully, more coherently.
Please take extra care to note that I don’t go around talking about my accomplishments, but I believe some context might help you better understand my questions. I’m what many would regard as successful. I’m good at what I do and respected for it. I’ve achieved my financial goal at the age of 37; I bought my parents a home; I bought myself a home; and even though I still consult, I can retire if I wanted to. I am at peak health, and can kill a man with my bare hands in a dozen different ways if required. I have had my success with women and slept with too many to count. Now I don’t consider that last bit a success (I have repented of my sin, and it’s been a while since I have been with a woman), but I mention it lest you think I’m some creep living in his mum’s basement. I also have a few close friends who wouldn’t hesitate to give their life for mine, as I would for theirs. I strive to keep the laws of God, from the weightiest to the least.
Now you seem to be suggesting that young men must seek to marry a highly educated woman who isn’t a feminist. I look around and all I see are feminists, even among those who aren’t highly educated. There’s no one in my church I’d want to marry. I blame the fathers, all a bunch of cowards who can’t even stand up to their wives, and it shows in their daughters’ hair and clothes. So, when deciding who to marry, why shouldn’t I pick an uneducated born-again woman who’d be grateful for all that I would give her? I don’t need a woman to work, but a woman who doesn’t work is trouble. I have a full-time chef and a part-time house help, so believe me when I say I don’t need a woman to work. But if she doesn’t keep herself busy with managing the home, then she will get herself and consequently me into trouble. The Apostle Paul said that, so take it up with him. None of the eligible woman in my church can cook or do what my mum and grandma does/did. My mum makes almost everything at home. Woman nowadays can’t even make their own dinner. It’s mighty clear what I bring to the table (more than a few of my mum’s friends have asked her if I’d be interested in their daughters), but tell me Pastor Wilson, what must the woman I marry bring to the table?
I admit, the struggle for sexual purity can get annoyingly hard. I go hang with my boys to distract myself. We together rent a co-working space so we can go work there when tempted. And I will happily admit, that it would be nice to spend some evenings with a lady rather than these cu-ts (endearing term for my boys), but still the question remains: what must the woman bring to the table? Companionship? Sure, but is companionship worth it with lazy highly educated, unsubmissive woman? If a woman isn’t actively trying to assist you in your purpose, and pursuit of greatness; she’s a liability, not an asset. She’s using you. She doesn’t desire you. When a woman desires you, she’ll be cooperative, and highly supportive. Now where do I find a supportive woman? Are my chances higher here in the West or in some third-world country? Do I have better odds with those who are highly educated or with those who are not?
Didn’t you say that when a woman enters a man’s job, both the nature of the job and the woman changes for the worse? Then to what end, Pastor Wilson, to what end do you want the woman to be educated? I work with men who are the best in their field. None of them have woman as confidants or colleagues. Women for them are purely for pleasure. These men come from various different backgrounds and work in different vocations. And the one thing common among them, as opposed to what we are shown in the movies, is when it comes down to serious business, woman are never involved. It can’t be serious business if they are. I’m not advocating for laws to be enforced to keep woman out of the workplace. I’m just saying that there’s a pattern here. Woman can do whatever it is they want with their time, in the Lord, but if you want to get serious work done, if you are pursuing greatness and excellence, you want to remove all kinds of distractions. And God’s masterpiece, which he fashioned with great care, is for men the most welcome distraction. Men who are serious about their work and seek greatness know this and do whatever is necessary. They don’t make too much noise about it, cause you don’t want to unnecessarily trigger the Karens if you know what I mean. But the point I’m making is that, not only are women today not helpful at home. They are a distraction in the work place where most of them shouldn’t be.
I believe even you, Pastor Wilson, have put women up on a pedestal where they don’t belong. Remember what Yahweh told David when rebuking him, “I gave you your master’s house and your master’s wives into your care” (2 Sam 12:8). God gave women to David like property. God even said he would have given David more women if he wanted. David should have asked instead of breaking God’s laws. Remember, the telos of a woman is her husband. That’s the primary purpose for her being created. Tell me I’m wrong. If God gives me a wife and if he gives me a daughter, I surely will do my best to ensure she’s highly educated, but I will also teach her about her station in life, and what she must become if she wants to marry a top-tier man. Be a husband-lover and children-lover. How? By providing pleasure and nurture and being a good homemaker. That’s what a woman should excel in first. Sure, educate your daughters so she isn’t attracted to dumb-blokes, and so she can take the load of her husband when raising the kids in the admonition and nurture of Yahweh. But do not forget that the woman is made for the man—to help him. Not the other way around—for the man to help the woman’s goals. Again, Paul said that. You and a lot of other men romanticise the relationship between man and wife a little too much. There’s a time and place for romance, but let’s not forget that Yahweh gave woman like cattle to David. Abraham didn’t pimp his wife out out of fear. He went and took on five kings. He just didn’t put her up on a pedestal. And guess what? Such men, women desire and therefore support. Sarah supported him. She was an asset to him.
The point I’m making is simple. Educate your daughters, but when deciding who to marry in our age, pick someone who has the most faith. And what does Paul say is the highest expression of faith in a woman? Complete submission to the authority in her life (father or husband; it’s complicated if she has neither, but that’s another topic). Does she call her father “lord”? If yes, put a ring on it. Why? If she regards her father as lord, she surely will regard her husband as lord. Note that Sarah didn’t secretly regard Abraham as lord, she made it public. But here’s the main point—it is much easier for godly man to train and teach a submissive woman to be an asset to him than a non-submissive one. And that, Pastor Wilson, is why her education doesn’t matter as much as you say it does, especially if the man is a successful. If she is educated, good. If she’s highly educated, even better. But that’s like comparing a believer with an unbeliever. It doesn’t matter how awesome the unbelieving woman is. You are not to marry her. So, given our times (and that part must be emphasised, given our times), I tell young men to use not one but two guidelines for picking a mate: 1) She must be a believer; 2) she must also highly respect her dad. And if it comes down to picking a believer who’s highly educated but doesn’t highly respect her dad and one who is uneducated but calls her dad “lord”, definitely go for the latter. You surely wouldn’t disagree, would you?
I believe you know deep down that you haven’t fully gotten a handle on this subject, this and the subject of your waist line, which is why you refuse to talk about them as much. But “all of Christ for all of life,” right? You’re good on most other subjects, which is why you don’t mind going head to head with leading atheists and unruly students. But this and the gym issue, you don’t say very much. To be fair, you’re in your mid 70s, and your waist line is a gnat. We still love good ol’ uncle Doug even though he’s swallowed a few extra gnats. So, I tell young men to go listen to you. You are the benchmark. You’ve dealt with most of the camels. But in certain areas, such as the topic of picking a wife or dealing with women, they need the counsel of other wise men. And so do you.
Now I love woman. I love my mum, both my sisters, and my niece. I believe woman ought to be protected and cherished. I believe they ought to be honoured, especially for their weaknesses. I reject the use of force or violence. This includes raised voices, sulking, and dagger eyes. Yet I also believe that to truly flourish, a man must break the feminine mindset. The best of us born of a woman, John the Baptist, could have lived a richer, fun-filled life if he married. He would have gotten various kinds of hot meals and nicely stitched clothes. But then he wouldn’t have been the best of the best. Not all of us are called to be Johns, but men should keep women out of the workplace, and seek a wife who honours her dad and loves being a homemaker. God gave me a great mum, she did the best she could for me. But I too had to learn, unfortunately the hard way, to break the feminine mindset so violently thrust upon all of us. I have been with many attractive women who who simply had no clue about what a successful man would want from a wife. They’ve all forgotten that there never was a time in history was a women’s job to relax and be fawned over, or worse yet, pursue a career. They were getting pregnant, gathering food, weaving cloth, churning butter. In other words, they were useful to their husband and children—they actually brought something to the table.
My words maybe strong, Pastor Wilson but, God as witness, I am your well-wisher. I believe God has given the church gifts, one of them being pastor-teacher; and in our age, you are most likely the best. You made it, you have fought the good fight, and I pray and hope along with you that you don’t screw up. So please don’t dismiss what I say as a hater. Also, I speak on behalf of many men. There are many like me. I’m not some fringe, hyper-masculine, nut job. A lot of men are miserable, especially those who aren’t successful, for they don’t know how handle a woman. Heck, even the successful ones have a hard time with them.
So in closing, since this is a long letter, here’s a summary of all that I’m saying:
I’m top-tier, because of all that I can bring to the table.
My mum is a top-tier woman, for all that she brought to the table.
Most highly-educated woman in our day are not top-tier.
Ultimately, the men are to blame for this dearth of quality women: fathers, husbands, and pastors.
Therefore, young men are better off looking for a mate among the underprivileged, for it will be easier for them to train a submissive, humble woman to be an asset than someone highly educated. That is a winning strategy in the second most important decision of a man’s life (marriage), and not masculinity on the cheap.
I haven’t heard you talk much about what a woman ought to bring to the table. Maybe a “Future Women” book is in order.
You are the best gift to the church in our age, so we (men like me) have great expectations from you.
With much love and sincerity,
PS: Either you’re wrong, we’re both wrong, or I’m greatly deluded. Even if you don’t reply, would you please pray that the Lord gives both of us extra grace to see the truth clearly.

John