Contents
Problems With the WBS Vid
A WBS request:
Hello Pastor Doug,
I realize by the time you read this letter Reformed X will have moved on to something else to grumble about, but I still haven’t been able to wrap my head around the whole White Boy Summer debate. I like the idea of a video compilation of white men hitting baseballs, fishing, and flexing for the camera over catchy music, but I understand there were subliminal messages scattered throughout.
I realize you are very busy, but if you could react to the latest WBS video and explain the frames that were genuinely sinister and unnecessary, that would be a huge help to those of us who are still scratching our heads.
Thanks,Anon
Anon, among other things, there was George Lincoln Rockwell, the one who founded the American Nazi Party (3:01), the film Triumph of the Will (3:12), and the torchbearer from the Nazi propaganda film Olympia (4:38). In short, this was not one of those made-up liberal dog whistles.
Nuisance Lust
I want to address an old post—Dealing With Nuisance Lust. I first read that post a couple of years ago, and I must say it has had a profound impact on me and my dealing with that temptation. I have used accountability software on all of my devices for a number of years now, but I’m starting to wonder if that sort of thing is the kind of “homemade nerf balls” you mention in the post. That is, a well-intentioned barrier that is actually doing more harm than good. Would you say that a married man ought to “grow out of” accountability software at some point?Joe
Joe, yes, I would say that. But not before the time.
Matt Walsh’s Deception
Not apropos of any particular post, so I’ll just ask the question on the current post:
Do you have any thoughts about Matt Walsh’s “Am I Racist?” Particularly, the slight kerfuffle on “our side” about whether or not it was appropriate to be deceptive in the making of the movie. I.e., he pretended to be a DEI expert, gave a false name at points, and as a result made absolute fools of DEI professionals, exposing them to be the grifters and charlatans that they are. But is this an appropriate use of deception? I just found and reread your post on David Daleiden’s Planned Parenthood sting operations (here) and it seems like this is a case of the second, prophetic, use.
Curious if you had any thoughts about it!
Thanks!Jake
Jake, yes, I do. Liars lie in order to maintain their lie. Truth-tellers can lie in the set-up to a reveal because their purpose and intention is to reveal the truth. This is what Nathan did to David—he had him pass judgment on a bogus case so that he could then reveal that David had passed judgment on himself (2 Sam. 12:4ff). This is what one of the sons of the prophets did to Ahab after the battle with Ben-hadad (1 Kings 20:38ff). Totally legit.
Ranked Choice Voting
I agree with the problems of ranked choice voting, but would they not still have write-in spots? If they did then casting one vote would still be possible by writing in yourself, your pastor and a third, none of whom would have a chance outside of hysterical providence.Craig
Craig, correct. I suppose you could do that, just as you could also stay home.
Regarding Prop 1:
I live in Anchorage and have unfortunately been subjected to ranked choice voting. It is reported that backers of Uber RINO Lisa Murkowski got this pushed through and now we have Peltola. The fact is that the Democrats are more organized than Republicans and have been able to reap the advantages of this voting scheme. This year the Republicans may be getting smarter as there was some self-sacrificing, as candidates with less initial votes dropped out of race to avoid splitting the vote. We have a chance to remove Peltola. What is funny is the Democrats have a convicted felon living out of state who was in sixth place but has now been bumped up to a ballot position because of the Republicans dropping out. The Democrats have been suing to have this guy removed now but failed to convince the superior and supreme courts up here.Jeremiah
Jeremiah, thanks.
Alaska passed ranked choice voting shortly before I moved here. We had one full election cycle under it, and now are trying to remove it.
The thing I must emphasize more than anything else to those that innocently advocate for it or to those that are open minded on the subject is that the entire systems incorrectly operates under a single blind assumption: That people who vote correctly according to the system’s design intent.
Alaska gets but a single house Rep. There were three relevant candidates previously. Mary Peltola, the far leftist who openly campaigns on abortion, Nick Begich, the local genuine conservative, and Sarah Palin, who needs no introduction.
You’ll note that this means a split vote for Republicans and a unified vote for Democrats. But wait! No worries. Ranked choice voting solves that problem! Well the thing nobody counted on was that a very large portion of the electorate, the elderly, the blue collar fishermen who don’t pay attention, the less than astute and aware church ladies, simply voted as though it were a first past the post election without any accounting for the new system. A double digit percentile of the votes simply disappeared in between the two rounds of counting, and Mary Peltola wins. So in a solidly red anti-woke state where no one paid attention to COVID mandates, local politicians openly campaign on faith-based private charity as the solution to poverty, and Target’s pride merchandise was put on clearance almost immediately before being donated to thrift stores due to lack of interest, we wound up with a state rep who votes in line with the Biden administration 80% of the time.
The biggest obstacle though is that the very people who make ranked choice voting the problem that it is, the ones that don’t understand the new strategy in voting that it creates, are the very ones who are difficult to communicate with about why its a problem. It isn’t a very sound bytable argument.Justin
Justin, thanks for responding.
On Bad Ideas
Open primaries are a terrible idea, particularly in any sort of jungle (aka “top two/four”) structure. I grant that. There’s simply no excuse for pushing that idea forward.
Ranked choice voting, however, is an excellent idea . . . so long as it is done right. It should not require voters to rank (vote for) anyone at all, much less rank everyone. In fact, so long as it doesn’t require ranking of candidates you don’t wish to win at all, it would effectively provide you your desired “None of the above” option, where it would be possible for all candidates to lose if none got over 50%.
So yes, the devil is in the details, and there can be terrible versions of RCV, but if the ballots have a physical paper audit trail, full transparency into the counting, and do not require voting for any candidate, much less all of them, then I would count it a huge improvement. I would be thrilled to put, for instance, a Constitution party candidate as my number one choice with the Republican as a backup.
Don’t throw out the RCV idea entirely. Just firmly reject evil bastardizations of it.NB
NB, thanks, everybody. I appreciate all these responses.
Being new to Idaho elections, I was thankful for the millions of dollars spent to distribute a full-sized newspaper to every house in the state for the expressed purpose of writing down for my evening enjoyment every disheartening word of that Proposition. It let me know 1) just how horrible a piece of claptrap—you forgot to mention “claptrap”—this is, and 2) just how much money the State spends to let everyone know all its bad ideas.
Happy to have a voice in Idaho. I’m going to vote vociferously in the negative and then rejoice when it plummets to the ground like an anvil over Wile E. Coyote’s head. Hoping for a satisfyingly loud “clang” at the end of it, and maybe a flattened head or two.Andy
Andy, yeah, let’s hope so.
Re: Prop 1: A Five Gallon Bucket of Bad Ideas
You wrote, “All the candidates, no matter what party they belong to, are all in the same primary election. We throw everybody into the same pot, and the four top vote-getters then get to advance to the general election. In that general election, you do not get to vote for just one candidate, no, but you must instead rank all the candidates in order of your preferences. This forces you to vote for each candidate at some level. Maybe you didn’t want to vote for any commies as your third and fourth choices, but that’s is too bad. You aren’t against democracy, are you? Hater.”
This is incorrect. All ranked choice voting systems that I’m aware of, including the one being proposed in Idaho, does not require voters to rank all candidates. They have the option to only vote for 1, or to rank however many they choose.
You also wrote, “The officials who are to be entrusted with EVERYTHING will then take all the ballots to a secure location somewhere, in order to conduct some SERIOUS MATH. After lots and lots of tabulations, which will not be a transparent process—are you joking?—they will take a few days to continue doing their SERIOUS MATH, until they finally figure out that they needed to carry the 2, divide by 6, multiply by the square root of 16, and then a winner is declared. It takes this long because the lowest vote-getter is dropped, and then the second, third, and fourth preferences of those discarded votes have to be taken into account. And call me nervous, but I can’t shake the feeling that people who come up with ideas like this one are not very good at math.”
Whatever one believes about transparency or lack thereof in our voting systems, ranked choice doesn’t make it worse. The tallies for each candidate are tabulated and made public via the same processes.Kenneth
Kenneth, your second point first. I think it does make it worse because every additional complication makes it easier to hide or to obfuscate. As to the option of not voting for all the options, I am happy to stand corrected if I was misinformed. But even if that is the case, and a person can vote for just the person he wants, this means his vote is worth less than the person who gets to vote for other options also. For example, should the person who votes for only one option have his vote counted as being worth 1.6 votes?
On ranked choice voting:
I’m actually quite in favor of ranked choice voting—but only in the general election. The entire purpose of it conceptually is to help break up the duopoly that we’re stuck in—but not to adjust how the parties select their candidates, which frankly should be left to the parties to do, not dictated by each state. That being said, clearly ranked choice voting requires a higher bar of election integrity to cleanly pull off, and most states are failing to meet even minimal standards of transparency in that regard.Ian
Ian, thank you. Interesting.
Abolition
Hello Mr. Wilson. I am a regular Christian wife and mom. My family and I live in Virginia at the moment. I am a Canon Plus subscriber and I love the content. I am writing to you to disagree with your position on abolition verse incrementalism. I watched the debate between yourself and Mr. Hunter. I also watched your response video. Two points stood out to me. One, we can live and work within the government we have. We have a Bill of Rights which protects life, liberty and property. All abolitionists are asking for is to equally enforce the homicide laws already on the books. Two, there are crazies on all sides of any position. What is the point of bringing that up? Isn’t that just a resort of someone who has a bad argument? I appreciate you and the fact that you are in favor of bills of abolition. Christians should be prepared for this to take time. However, the bills of partiality have not worked. It is time to move on. Thank you and God bless you and the great work you do. Sincerely,Misty
Misty , thanks for the feedback.
Prosecuting Political Rivals
Re: “Prosecuting Enemies” section of 9/26 Letters and quite a few Blog posts as well as several Plodcasts.
I’m glad you now agree that where there are crimes by officials in the party losing an election, they do need to be prosecuted. I agree those crimes need to actually BE crimes. The standard of multiple smoking guns is too high, as is the grace to the opposition leaders I’ve heard in your discussion of this topic.
Trump did not prosecute Hillary. Remember, that was already AFTER the Obama admin had weaponized the IRS against Trump and Palin personally and conservative orgs generally, and the CIA and FBI against Trump and Gen. Mike Flynn, among others. When Trump let Hillary skate, what was the Dem response? To go full-scale law-fare against Trump and anyone in his orbit. And no one fought back, during the Trump administration and since. Unsurprisingly, the law-fare has escalated. Once again we have the GOP counting on Marquis of Queensbury rules while the Dems are on Sherman’s March to the Sea.
I would not claim to have the infallible answer here, but I don’t see anything working to bring this back into balance other than a full scorched-earth policy on anyone for whom there is any evidence for the various scandals and abuses of government the Dems have perpetrated. It needs to follow the law, and be done without malice, but they need to be bankrupted and if guilty, jailed. The response of everyone involved must be “this is what the Dems asked for.” THEN, we can have a reconciliation commission and go back to civility, if and only if the Dems are willing.Mitchell
Mitchell, I do agree that as a matter of justice, this is certainly called for. But this kind of prosecution is right on the threshold of civil war, and so the evidence needs to be at Hunter laptop levels. It needs to be manifestly clear that the prosecutors are pursuing justice and not settling scores.
Regarding prosecuting political enemies in righteous defense of the Constitution:
Doug, in the past, you have advocated for Trump to not prosecute, without loss of generality, Hillary. In a recent response to a letter, you said you’ve changed your mind on that.
I’m reminded of the Biblical case of David. He had political enemies who deserved just punishment, but he was not in a position to give it to them. But then on his deathbed, he charged his son Solomon, of Joab, “do not let his grey hair go down to Sheol in peace” and of Shimei, “bring his gray hair down to Sheol with blood”.
So perhaps we should still be saying that President Trump should not prosecute his political enemies, but instead be demanding that President Vance prosecute to the full extent of the law, again without loss of generality, Hillary?E
E, I think there is something to that. I alluded to this in my answer to the previous letter. Certain cases cannot be brought without the sufficient political capital. Your illustration is a good one—David did not have the political capital to deal with Joab, and Solomon did. It would be wonderful if a President Vance did have an opportunity to restore justice to the justice system.
How Come?
In your store you accept Paypal, Venmo and Pay later. Why no credit cards? Thank you.John
John, the plug-in I have handles all of that automatically. The simple answer is that “I don’t know,” and “maybe someday.” But it would have to be something that I could offer without having to pay any attention to it whatever.
Lopsided Broadcasting or Jaundiced Viewing?
As much as I enjoy your content and the content of Canon+/Press I must admit I’m perplexed as to one consistency I see among it all. Why do Moscow and its affiliates seem to be so keen on giving the middle finger to the culture? This is not me critiquing your use of the Jolly Roger in that now infamous NSA ad, but rather the frequency of those types of communication? It is of course very necessary to use prophetic language and to call the world’s ways into question and to wage our war against the darts of the enemy.
But where is that Postmillenial Hope in Moscow’s Media Output? As a Zoomer myself, I see a generation that, while insolent, ungrateful, clownish, and rebellious, is in desperate need of some grace and hope. Christianity offers hope and rest like no other religion can, it offers real true purpose, and a place to take responsibility in safety without being crushed by it. Why do you, Moscow, and the CREC in general, seem so keen on swinging about that flaming sword of Scripture? Where are the wings for the broken to gather under? Where is the gracious invitation of love, hope, peace, and rest? Why is it that even I, as a Canon+ Subscriber and follower of your content, feel as if I have to dig for that good news that Moscow so often boasts of?
May the Lord pour out his love and righteousness upon you.Kenneth
Kenneth, I think that you are simply viewing what you expect to be seeing. We have tons of content that we put out that is not embroiled in the cultural fray at all. I would ask you to track down my marriage books, child-rearing books, education books, my commentaries, my devotional, poetry, and so on. I sometimes think that critics are addicted to reading what they think I am addicted to writing.
Reading List?
I stumbled across a talk by your son. He’s great. Great job Pastor Wilson. Where can I find a complete reading list on rhetoric taught at NSA?
On that note, would NSA and GFH opensource their syllabus and reading list, so that those who can’t make it there can try and keep up with the syllabus?
Thanks,Jake
Jake, is this what you had in mind?
A Friendly Voice
Hello Pastor Wilson,
I’ve followed you for many years. I find you to be a fascinating individual. I believe that you are honest, sincere, and about as pure in intention as one could be. We’ve met in person and you once offered me advice regarding forgiveness that was incredibly helpful and to which I’ve returned several times over the years as a guide when the subject comes up. And yet I disagree with your stance on nearly everything. Our worldviews are worlds apart. I suppose that is where the fascination comes in. And I don’t follow/read you so that I can get a kick out of denigrating your viewpoint. Rather I keep coming back as one might to a telescope pointed at the moon, again and again, to appreciate the view for what it is. Maybe to see something new or with a fresh perspective and deeper understanding. There is a voyeuristic aspect to it I suppose. You are a lens into a world that I used to know. It was my house, but never my home. But it’s nice to drive by once in a while to check in on how things are going. It serves as a gauge of sorts, to see how much my perspective has changed or maybe the neighborhood has changed. Probably a bit of both.
A simple question for you. If Jesus was in your presence, like in walking, talking, physical bodily form, would you know? If so, what makes you certain?
Although we disagree, I appreciate you. For being genuine. For giving a damn. For keeping the conversation . . . interesting.
Regards,Steve
Steve, thanks for all the kind words. And to answer your question about Jesus, the answer is yes, I think I would. But this is not because I am so sharp but rather because Christ is the revelation of God. He manifests.
Losing Is As Losing Does
If a man said that if an intruder were to break into his house and try and rape his wife, he would try and plead with the intruder and try and share the gospel with him, instead of attacking him. Wouldn’t you label such a man a loser? Good men would fight and not hesitate to kill in such situations, right?
Thanks,Peter
Peter, yes. Good men would fight in that situation. And I would label a man a loser for trying to plead with an intruder. But there are men with that (mistaken) moral conviction who would have enough moral authority and charisma to pull it off. So if such a man were to lead the intruder to Christ, and the wife was safe and protected, then I would have a hard time calling him a loser.
Comparative Populations of Heaven and Hell
In a recent letter, you stated that at the end of time more people will be in Heaven than in Hell. I’m wondering where you find that in Scripture as I read about a narrow versus a broad way, and a few there be that find it versus many that don’t. I also think of examples like all but eight people being killed by the Flood, etc.Caroline
Caroline, two responses. The first is a positive statement, and the second answers the objection of the “narrow way.” John hears the symbolic number of the elect in Revelation 7, which is 144,000. And then . . . what? “After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could number, of all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, with palm branches in their hands” (Rev. 7:9). How many will be saved? We can’t count that high. As for the narrow way. This is talking about first century Judea. Only a few are saved (Luke 13:23-24). They object, saying that they had heard Him teaching in their streets (Luke 13:26). They will be thrust out of the kingdom (Luke 13:28). But then what happens? “They will come from the east and the west, from the north and the south, and sit down in the kingdom of God” (Luke 13:29). Then the Gentiles will flood in.
A Challenge
My husband and I have 5 children. My oldest son is 18 and a senior in high school. What is my role concerning him in the house? If we need work done outside or I need to require him to get certain things done before he gets together with friends, or works for someone else for that matter, what are the best guidelines for me to follow? I tend to be a much stronger personality than my husband, however I want to obey the Lord in keeping my place in the home and honor my husband and son also. Any guidance you can give me in this regard would be greatly appreciated.Stephanie
Stephanie, it is really hard to answer a question like this from this far away. I would need to answer without knowing you, or your family. Your requests might be totally reasonable, and your son just needs clear direction. If that is the case, sit down with him and your husband together and make a plan regarding what sorts of things you should assign to him. As long as he is living at home, he needs to mind you. That is one possibility. But another possibility is that you have your husband whipped, but not your son. If you think that this might be a possibility, that your “stronger personality” is coming on stronger than you realize, I would encourage you to have a talk with your husband about that. Ask him if he thinks you come on like gangbusters to your son, if he thinks your stronger personality needs to be dialed back. Assure him beforehand that you will not display that personality if he gives the wrong answer.
Translation and the Name of God
A Chesterton’s Fence situation
I’m curious your thoughts about the LSB translation. I appreciate the ministry of James White and he is partial to the LSB and I know uses the Lord’s name in his preaching. One of the unique parts of the LSB is the use of God’s name revealed to Moses as opposed to the all caps LORD.
I’ve always been a bit hesitant to use God’s name because it’s seems to me that if they were so careful not even to spell it out all the way so as not to dishonor the Lord and most of our modern translations choose to “hide” it by using LORD then ought I to be careful?
For me this is one of those, I want to know why most translations in English have done it this way before I change translations and take out the all caps “LORD.” If I can’t explain the fence I definitely shouldn’t take it down.
Thankful for your ministry.Shea
Shea, I certainly don’t mind translations that use YHWH, but I don’t mind the use of LORD either. In Joel 2:32, it says this: “And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord [YHWH] shall be delivered.” But when Paul quotes it in Romans 10:13, he says this:“For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord [kurios] shall be saved.” It follows that it is lawful to render YHWH with a completely different word like LORD, which is what kurios means.
Instruction by the Way
Thank you for all your thinking and writing.
This really stuck out to me in your recent blog post “Jim and Bessie”—”Once I bought a comic book—one of the idiotic kind where Sgt. Rock, or somebody like him, blazes his way through the Pacific theatre—and when my father saw me reading it, he made me return it to the store. He was a veteran of the Korean War, and no pacifist, but he told me in no uncertain terms that the Jap caricatures in the comic book were, in real life, husbands, fathers, and brothers.”
How does one train their sons in healthy aggression and violence while also not cultivating a callousness toward human life?Taylor
Taylor, the way it happened with me was a combination of my father’s war stories and his instruction in situations like that one. Conversations about war movies, for example, would be the place where a father teaches that kind of thing. And he would also see that his sons are put in challenging situations where they need to learn to be tough, which is one of the principal benefits of athletics.
Conversation About the Finger Continues
As per your request in your interview with Gabe Hughes on Wrath & Grace TV, I want to suggest a way in which the NSA ad could have been better.
Replace, “Johnny Cash’s favourite finger,” with, “Boniface’ favourite axe.”
I say this because the middle finger gesture, aside from expressing anger, does not accomplish what needs to be done to an idol or to an altar of idolatry: its immediate and complete destruction. Boniface did just that when he chopped down Thor’s oak and thus the Germans were set free to believe in Christ. The middle finger just doesn’t go far enough. Are we interested in simply getting angry at idols, or are we interested in destroying idols, which is the perfect expression of anger, and pleasing to God? “The LORD is for me among those who help me; Therefore I shall see my desire on those who hate me” (Psalm 92:11).
Also, I don’t agree with your assessment that the f-word has lost its sexual connotation. Used in the imperative tense, it definitely still has that connotation. Besides, the middle finger gesture itself is meant to look like an erect phallus.
Therefore, with that in mind, I will be hoisting the Jolly Roger, and using Boniface’ axe against the idols of our generation. Or, perhaps, Phinehas’ favourite spear!
“We’ll be sharpening the axe to cut down ol’ Donar’s oak!
We’ll be sharpening the axe to cut down ol’ Donar’s oak!
We’ll be sharpening the axe to cut down ol’ Donar’s oak!
For the Lord, He’s stronger far.”
Amen!Chris
Chris, thanks. No objection at all to using the Boniface imagery. And I agree that it goes farther in application than does the expression of contempt shown by the middle finger. But I don’t argue that the finger has lost its sexual connotation, just that it has lost a necessary sexual connotation.
Fun Feedback
I just wanted to tell you how much I enjoy your fiction books, especially The Man in the Dark. I don’t know of many stories where the female protagonists are brave and spunky (and have great throwing aim) while being very feminine and having a gentle and quiet spirit at the same time.
Thanks so much!Darla’s younger sister
DYS, thanks very much.
Hi, I’m a member of an RPCNA church convinced of a lot of old school Presbyterian stuff (exclusive psalmody, not doing Christian holidays, etc). On the other hand, we’re evaluating a CREC nearby (because grape juice is a much bigger deal than the RPCNA is stuck thinking, due to its history with temperance). We want to hear your team’s best defense of how things like the creeds, church calendar, and hymnody are RPW compliant—any resources you can point us toward?Dan
Dan, I would recommend two of my books—Mother Kirk and A Primer on Worship and Reformation. I think most of the questions you raise are addressed there.
The Conversation With John Continues
You’re not answering my main questions. Let me try and state them succinctly:
(1) High-performing men rarely co-work with women. For women are a distraction. Women in the workplace and in polling stations is bad for society. Do you agree?
(2) Men are to slog to excel as lord, husbandman, saviour, sage, and glory-bearer, even take the bullet for the wife (part of being a saviour) if called to it, but what must a woman bring to the table? Being a good cook is one, I think you would agree. But what else are men to expect from a woman? I would say bearing children, raising them, and taking care of the home. That’s how a piety shows itself in a woman (cf. 1 Tim 5:4; 5:14). What would you say?
(3) Being my chief-adviser? I’m not trying to be dismissive but I’m finding it extremely hard to see where I would need her advice. Also, there are very few women in my line of work, and I don’t have the time to explain it to her if she doesn’t already get it. I’d rather she just focus on what she ought to be doing, instead of trying to advise me in areas that I’m already good at. What difference does it make to a high-performing man if his wife tracks with his work? He’s already good at it. He needs no help from her there. Women ought to appreciate the fruit of his labour instead than trying to understand the details of that labour. So, would you agree that the wife’s end is to be an asset to her husband in the way that he wants her to be?
(4) You say that the respect of a highly-educated woman is more valuable. But wouldn’t the better motivation for respecting her husband be the fear of the Lord, rather than her ability to apprehend the difficulty of his work? What if the Lord joined a highly educated woman to a not-so-highly educated man? Unequally yoked, some might say. Then wouldn’t also a high-performing man who married a highly-educated woman who isn’t a good homemaker be unequally yoked? And is the highly-educated woman to respect the man less? I don’t see how the wife’s education affects the quality of reverence shown. But her fear of the Lord surely will though. Do you agree?
(5) One of the points I was trying to make in my previous mails was simply that, all things being equal, a homemaker is more preferable to high-performing men than a non-homemaker, and that the probability of finding a homemaker among the uneducated is higher than the educated. The goal is to find a homemaker, not someone uneducated. So to my question, do you agree that it’s going to take a considerable amount of time and effort for a woman to learn how to manage a home, and manage it well? And, if yes, then would you agree that parents ought to prioritise homemaking for their daughters before the sciences and arts?
(6) Finally, regarding women’s nature, do you agree that God has wired women to thrive when they assist a good man and not when they “live in self-indulgence” (1 Tim 5:6)? Yahweh gave David his “master’s wives” (2 Sam 12:8). It was good for the master’s wives (after the master died) to serve David. Paul tells young widows to “to get married, bear children, keep house” (1 Tim 5:14). There’s no such thing as soul mate. There’s only what is “acceptable in the sight of God” (5:4) and what is not. Would you agree?
Sincerely,John
John, I agree with most of what you say here on paper. Most, not all. But even where you are reading the lyrics correctly, I believe that you have the tune all wrong. Of course it would be better to be with a woman who was uneducated but who loved Christ than to be with a highly-educated feminist. Of course. But there are two other options—the uneducated feminist and the highly-educated woman who loves domesticity. For an educated Christian man, the last one is to be highly preferred. I live in a community filled with women like that, and there is nothing to compare with it. You say that you don’t need the advice of a woman when it comes to your vocation . . . “I’m finding it extremely hard to see where I would need her advice.” Perhaps she can’t give you advice on the technical side of your up-coming presentation, say, but perhaps she could give you some much needed advice about your people-skills—how you might be coming off as a conceited lunkhead, and how your presentation is likely to crash and burn. But not because the math was wrong.
Boomers
Yay! Barnabas is back! Doug just uploaded a YouTube video specifically for you my goy 👍
“Goy” is anti-semitic by the way.
Lolol, sure dude.
You mean the one where he reads his own blog post so that he can collect $6 in YouTube monitization?
Hey. That employs somebody.
Obviously the incentive is not the monetization but the exposure.
Here are a few of the (according to Wilson) fictional Jews on my Dungeons and Dragons board. Merrick Garland – US Attorney General responsible for jailing January 6ers. Alejandro Mayorkas – US Secretary of Homeland Security keeping the borders open. Jonathan Greenblatt – CEO of the ADL. Decides what is or isn’t censored on the internet and who gets canceled. Rabbi Solomon Friedman – Owner of Pornhub. Leonid Radvinsky – Owner of Onlyfans. Not a porn site until he purchased the company. Victoria Nuland – Architect of the Ukrainian regime change and resulting war. That’s just a few. I got… Read more »
Barnabas, why the special hatred for Jews in general, then? You are free and fine to notice that a great many men and women of Jewish descent are committing these evils, but to hate all Jews for the acts of a select many (I don’t deny that there are many) is like hating all people of Aryan descent for the atrocities committed by the Third Reich.
Have some discernment about you.
Why are you changing the subject? Doug Wilson says that the Alt-right hates fictional Jews. Those aren’t fiction.
Ok, how about this, let’s think of it like a ledger. On the negative side, we have Mayorkas destroying our country, Greenblatt censoring us, Friedman spreading the worst kinds of sexual filth.
What’s on the positive side? What have the other Jews done that ups their standing as a group? What makes them a net benefit for white Christians?
If they destroy my society it doesn’t really matter to me what gadgets they developed.
Solomon Friedman was ordained a rabbi in Jerusalem but has never worked as one. He’s a partner in a private equity company that acquired PornHub in 2023. Friedman primarily works as a defense lawyer and has been certified as a specialist in criminal law. He addresses Parliament on legal and gun-control (he’s against it) issues. He’s also an adjunct professor at the University of Carleton’s School of Law. He hopes to make the company more “ethical” but that seems like a lost cause to me. Does your D&D board include the 214 Jews who have won Nobels? Despite being 0.2%… Read more »
Sure they act individually and collectively to bribe and blackmail US politicians, drag America into war and plan, fund, lobby for and gloat about white replacement but they also invented the Soda Stream. I can enjoy a refreshing carbonated beverage in the comfort of my own home.
When people point out your argument has glaring factual inaccuracies, and you ignore them, you don’t win converts.
I was going to point this out but Jill was on the board much faster than I was. Did you expect no one to realize that these companies are not owned by singular people, or did you honestly not realize it yourself?
OK, just to recap,Solomon Friedman is an ordained Rabbi but not a practicing Rabbi, he’s not the owner of Pornhub, merely the majority shareholder, and American capitalists didn’t sell the US manufacturing base to China, they simply shifted all manufacturing activities to China…I guess I have a lot of egg on my face.
How exactly was the pacemaker for humans designed to bribe politicians? By keeping them alive longer? Would you refuse one on the grounds that its implanation in your heart might contribute to white replacement? If you think it is programmed to deliver subliminal messages (Jews rule, the goyim drool), I suppose you might.
I find it hard to take Pastor Wilson’s response to Kenneth seriously. If you have a nephew who’s clever, hard-working, does lots of good stuff, and also has a habit of once every month or two sticking his middle up at people (all in the best taste and in a good cause, of course), of drawing attention to himself with self-agrandising and questionable stunts, and throwing shade on certain people in a way that suggests he has a chip on his shoulder about them, what *are* you going to talk to him about? The weather? His taste in music? And… Read more »
You’ve established a hypothetical that depicts a sequence of events you know both sides don’t agree is factual, then point to the aspects you know people don’t agree on as your primary evidence.
Yes, we know what both sides think. Restating the accusations against Doug is not the same as substantiating them.
Doug, what specifically was offensive about those NSDAP references? Literally just “muh Nazis” and that’s it? What other political regimes can men with national socialist ideological tendencies even make reference to?
The right just won the majority of votes in Austraia. As in other European countries we can expect the center right to ally with Greens and socialists the keep the right from forming a government and reversing any of the damage done by the left. To quote Wilson, “ We should want nothing whatever to do with them, meaning that I am not trying to break up a coalition here. I want to deny them entrance into the coalition.”
Post more middle fingers and burning furniture and tell us about fake masculinity.
Justin & Jeremiah – I am also in Anchorage! Let’s connect!
I’m down KGB. I’d give my number but, well…. its the internet.
What church do you go to?
Rabbit Creek. Live near Huffman / Hillside. And that’s the same reason I didn’t leave my number LOL
John,
If you don’t understand the importance of what Doug is saying to you at the end of his reply, pray about it. I used to be that guy and still am in my tougher moments. And I see that guy in others the minute I see them. In other words, I am an expert lunkheadist and detectorist of lunkheads. Doug is doing you a great service here and I suspect you aren’t seeing it.
If I were a fed Id tell you that you were just about to win and all you had to do was not speak out against the people in power. Which is what Doug Wilson is saying.
“But even if that is the case, and a person can vote for just the person he wants, this means his vote is worth less than the person who gets to vote for other options also. For example, should the person who votes for only one option have his vote counted as being worth 1.6 votes?” I suspect you could be overthinking it. If you opt to only vote for 1 candidate and not rank any of the others, it’s functionally the same thing as if there was a run-off between 2 of the other candidates and you chose not… Read more »
Here in Australia, I’m not aware of any government election that doesn’t use “preferential” (i.e. ranked choice) voting, and it mostly works pretty well Some caveats: You have to understand how the system works. If you have 7 candidates, then it’s exactly the same as 6 run-off elections where the candidate with the lowest #1 vote is eliminated every round, and only those people who voted for the eliminated candidate get to change their vote It’s actually fairly important to NOT let your vote “expire”, unless you genuinely don’t care about the remaining options. The best way to ranked choice… Read more »
I used to be in Toastmasters. That is a self-help public speaking club. Members give prepared speeches and experienced members give reviews. I one time gave a technical speech. The woman who reviewed my speech was an older German woman. She let me know in very Teutonic no uncertain terms how boring it was for women to listen to my speech.
It’s true that the Nazis were socialists. It’s also true that American capitalists sold the manufacturing base of the United States to the Chinese so maybe rethink your categories.
Terrible that someone would have the audacity to show clips of the 1936 Olympic games. Please stick to capitalist Neoliberal games, perhaps a tranny mockery of the Last Supper.
I’m sure the man of the blog despises that mockery almost as much as you do. He would surely prefer to see Eric Liddell cross the finish line. But I am with you in that Jesse Owen’s victory is not all it’s cranked up to be. While Jesse Owens was fully human, his victory proves neither equality or humanity, as a cheetah could outrun him, and few would say cheetahs are equal to man.
“It’s also true that American capitalists sold the manufacturing base of the United States to the Chinese” This is not only not true, its not possible. Unless what you meant to say is “American Capitalists began to do their manufacturing work in China”. That’s certainly true, its just also not that dramatic of a point. Manufacturing jobs are far less important a sector than people pretend, value is returned in the form of low cost goods so it isn’t a strict loss, those Capitalists were already exporting jobs to Taiwan and Mexico before the Chinese problem, and they will do… Read more »
John, it doesn’t take long for a reasonably intelligent woman to become skillful in managing a home. Watch enough Youtube videos, follow them step by step, and anyone can turn out perfect puff pastry, hem pants as beautifully as a tailor, sew dresses for the children, re-finish a piece of furniture, and organize the kind of birthday party that makes other moms look at you sideways. A lot of highly educated women who give it all up to become homemakers throw themselves into it with the same drive and organizational skills that made them successful in their careers. These are… Read more »
Though a thorough education in history and classics wouldn’t help out much there, either, nor would a degree in physics do much for her ability to teach them about epistemology.
But I’m only picking on your specificity — I agree that a solid education prepares a mother to teach and supervise the education of her children, with the aid of specialists, in a marginally far greater way, than a year of intensive cooking lessons prepares her to keep them properly and economically fed.
You’re completely correct Jill, but in fairness its also not all that difficult for a reasonably intelligent person to teach themselves quadratic equations with youtube videos. If you start with someone capable of self-education, what kind of formal education they’re given becomes something of a moot point.
Not that I’m agreeing at all with John. I would say that measuring wife candidates based on contributing skills itself is unwise. I would rather marry a loyal and Godly useless person than an unfaithful genius.
Justin, I agree with your last point, except to say, a spouse who is really useless and can at all help it is not very loyal and or Godly.
I would agree *if* she stays that way over time.
A 19 year old useless person was really at the mercy of their parents’ to pass on skills until quite recently.
John, except for the self-employed, high performance men work with women because both have jobs at many of the same places. Where are you getting the idea men do not do this?
How far off is the attitude towards women here from Andrew Tate? Pitiful.
“Here”? You mean one guy who keeps writing in, and the blog owner and all the commenters who keep telling him he’s a lunkhead?
Lolol, happy I’m getting to you Jane.
Peter, Doug, The man with enough moral authority to convince a rapist not to rape his wife and turn to the gospel is a loser for not shooting just for taking the chance. Sorry, my conviction is that it is too late for that rapist to convert once he puts himself into that scenario. Now, if he survives the shooting, I might consider going to the hospital to convert him then, but not before. Shoot first, then convert later if possible.
Doug Wilson believes that the State monopoly on violence extends into a man’s home…therefore the correct course of action is stand aside and call the police.
Interesting use of false witness here. Not sure it’s very strategic, given how easy it is to prove your bad faith.
— Pastor Doug, here on this page, in the answer to that very letter.
Oh well, trolls gonna troll.
I never said he was consistent or logical. That’s what he calls being a wit.
Barnabas, I am very sorry for running over your dog. Or whatever it was.
John, you can place an order with a credit card via the Paypal option.
I’ve been tracking John’s conversations with Pastor Wilson since he started, and the most glaring problem here is the arrogance. I pray that no woman draws near in any sort of romantic sense, while he exhibits such apparent misogyny. I’m no feminist but this man has only paid lip service to the self sacrificial role that men are required to have day in and day out. John needs to immerse himself in learning to give grace, and be humble and die to himself for others. High performance is nothing without love, and a virtuous woman who is of average talent… Read more »
I’m interested in what advice Doug would offer to a woman who is married to him and experiencing abuse. If the elders aren’t helpful and he refuses to submit to their authority, what options does she have? Doug has indicated that this situation wouldn’t justify divorce. How long should she endure this, hoping for change?