# Is Douglas Wilson dangerous?



## No one

Greetings, I have been reading posts about Douglas Wilson on here for a few months now but most of them seem a bit older and I wanted to know if anything has changed regrading his status as a false teacher? The reason I ask is because I am seeing many reformed Baptists not only recommend him but cite him frequently. Specifically, My former churches elder board was a fan of him. Any thoughts would be helpful and appreciated.


----------



## RamistThomist

He is very dangerous, both theologically and pastorally. He formally holds to the 2007 FV Statement. He has not repudiated the essence of FV, merely the name. He also encouraged a parishioner to marry a pedophile and he sided with rapists (as defined by the law) in court.

Reactions: Like 5 | Amen 1


----------



## No one

BayouHuguenot said:


> He is very dangerous, both theologically and pastorally. He formally holds to the 2007 FV Statement. He has not repudiated the essence of FV, merely the name. He also encouraged a parishioner to marry a pedophile and he sided with rapists (as defined by the law) in court.


Could you send me links on this. Then why are reformed Baptists recommending him if he is do dangerous this is what I don't understand


----------



## A.Joseph

I think we have to consider matters and teachings that require humility and potential disqualification.

I'm too swift to write people off. However, I would look for DW to acknowledge shortcomings and poor judgment as a teaching authority and church leader, if warranted. I tend to avoid the 'where there's smoke there's fire' types. Too many solid teachers and leaders to go there.

Just some initial thoughts.


----------



## Ethan

Here are some resources below:









The Truth About Moscow







moscowid.net













Search Results for “wilson” – The Heidelblog


Recovering the Reformed Confession




heidelblog.net


----------



## No one

Ethan said:


> Here are some resources below:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Truth About Moscow
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> moscowid.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Search Results for “wilson” – The Heidelblog
> 
> 
> Recovering the Reformed Confession
> 
> 
> 
> 
> heidelblog.net


Thankyou sir.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Tom Hart

No one said:


> Then why are reformed Baptists recommending him if he is do dangerous this is what I don't understand


Douglas Wilson and others offer an appealing alternative to the flimsy, feminized version of Christianity that has in our day spread its shallow roots so far. There are Christians who, fleeing from that evil, hurry into the waiting jaws of wolves. They go from one social justice gospel to another on the other end of the spectrum. Either way, once they have made social issues the main thing, they've lost sight of Christ.

Reactions: Like 8


----------



## No one

Tom Hart said:


> Douglas Wilson and others offer an appealing alternative to the flimsy, feminized version of Christianity that has in our day spread its shallow roots so far. There are Christians who, fleeing from that evil, hurry into the waiting jaws of wolves. They go from one social justice gospel to another on the other end of the spectrum. Either way, once they have made social issues the main thing, they've lost sight of Christ


What should I do if I run into teachers/ pastors online or in churches who recommend Wilson?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Romans922

Reformed Baptists are flocking to him because James White (Calvinist baptist) has grown closer to him. RB like White. But James White himself is dangerous. But also I’d say what others said above too.

Reactions: Like 4 | Amen 1


----------



## Miller

Yes he's dangerous
Check out the Facebook group "Examining Doug Wilson & Moscow, ID"


----------



## SolaScriptura

He's dangerous, but no more so than the church fathers some here seem to hold in unnecessarily high esteem. 

Some here confuse their sour grapes with objective fact.

He's a mixed bag - so mixed that I don't recommend him uncritically. On most formal doctrinal issues and matters of exegesis he's got nothing to say that I can't hear better from others. BUT... And here's the big but: He's better than almost everyone out there when it comes to matters of analyzing the culture and thinking in terms of a robust Christian engagement with culture.

Reactions: Like 10


----------



## No one

Romans922 said:


> Reformed Baptists are flocking to him because James White (Calvinist baptist) has grown closer to him. RB like White. But James White himself is dangerous. But also I’d say what others said above too.


Could you explain why James White is dangerous? I'm not trying to argue I just don't know. But What James White said about those who don't like Douglas Wilson really bothered me.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## No one

SolaScriptura said:


> He's dangerous, but no more so than the church fathers some here seem to hold in unnecessarily high esteem.
> 
> Some here confuse their sour grapes with objective fact.
> 
> He's a mixed bag - so mixed that I don't recommend him uncritically. On most formal doctrinal issues and matters of exegesis he's got nothing to say that I can't hear better from others. BUT... And here's the big but: He's better than almost everyone out there when it comes to matters of analyzing the culture and thinking in terms of a robust Christian engagement with culture.


And that's why reformed Baptists recommend him?


----------



## No one

SolaScriptura said:


> He's dangerous, but no more so than the church fathers some here seem to hold in unnecessarily high esteem.
> 
> Some here confuse their sour grapes with objective fact.
> 
> He's a mixed bag - so mixed that I don't recommend him uncritically. On most formal doctrinal issues and matters of exegesis he's got nothing to say that I can't hear better from others. BUT... And here's the big but: He's better than almost everyone out there when it comes to matters of analyzing the culture and thinking in terms of a robust Christian engagement with culture.


And thankyou


----------



## Romans922

No one said:


> Could you explain why James White is dangerous? I'm not trying to argue I just don't know. But What James White said about those who don't like Douglas Wilson really bothered me.



well for one you have this: 




He’s been known to lie and be deceptive. As well when you critique his position he often just attacks you as a person instead of interacting with the critique. But his interactions now with Doug Wilson only show that his theology is flawed. As you can see with the others who have stated what they have about Doug Wilson and his false theology.


----------



## No one

Quite sad, I noticed during their talks many of Wilson's errors not only in evangelism but in the sacraments in general and white said nothing unless I missed something or a follow-up comment from Mr. White. It troubles me.


----------



## kodos

One cannot equate a man like Doug Wilson with the Church Fathers. That is a false equivalence as we live centuries after the Protestant Reformation.

The Fathers' theology was still in development. However, Wilson has _rejected _sound Reformed theology - see his book - "Reformed is not enough". I also cannot help but think they would have censured someone who wrote a pornographic book about a sex robot like Wilson has - "Ride Sally Ride".

The primary draw toward him is the same draw as to non-Christians like Ben Shapiro and other 'culture warriors'.

Reactions: Like 7 | Amen 3


----------



## Contra_Mundum

DW is a charmer, a charismatic personality type who knows how to gather a following; which is how he took over leadership of the church he attended, and made himself a pastor; and afterward, successfully brought in other churches to join his "federation," in which he continues as the top-dog. DW is not accountable the way pastors in an actual P&R denomination are--not to the elders of his congregation, not to a wider church. All the constituents of his federation are essentially independent churches, most of whom baptize babies and practice paedo-communion. So, the setup is functionally little different from a Baptist convention, plus sacraments. Except...

Most RBs won't sanction one of their own who is self-ordained. And yet, because they can identify a degree of separation from DW--"He isn't one of us, but more of a presbyterian"--they think to themselves, "His ordination issues are a problem for his own kind to deal with. We like his cultural polemics, his salty dialog." DWs own congregants consider him to be their pastor, so in the eyes of that all-important group _he occupies the office_. Then, he has all those sister-churches who recognize him, so they functionally regard this self-made pastor as a legitimate minister.

If you see it in a certain light: isn't that what denominations are about? Fellow churches and churchmen who regard one another as legitimate churches and ministers? That may be what it looks like from the perspective of Independency, but not from inside a properly constituted, organized P&R denomination. Men are called to the ministry by the church, not by themselves. The church recognizes and ordains a man to the office. They tell the rest of the church, "We're putting our stamp of approval on this man, and if you regard our judgment as anything you should feel safe regarding him as we do." Yet, we see ministers and congregations even within the P&R world granting DW the place of *teacher*; not just a dispenser of knowledge, but a spiritual guide for the immature and ignorant.

This is, frankly, madness. But when you ADD to that massive red-flag waving right out of the gate: all the rest of the aberrant theology, the pastoral misconduct, the coarseness of his tongue, his appalling reputation among outsiders (1Tim.3:7), etc.--it is clear that what attracts people to him is not theological care and precision, or the gentleness and pure spiritual greatness and mediatorial authority of Jesus whom he claims to represent. To have and project that is not a matter of charisma, but of calling. When RBs and P&Rs simply grant DW a platform, formally or informally, they are crediting him with authority he only has _from them, _whether they think he has his from Christ or not. Thus they validate him in the eyes of their brethren.

Reactions: Like 9 | Amen 2


----------



## No one

kodos said:


> One cannot equate a man like Doug Wilson with the Church Fathers. That is a false equivalence as we live centuries after the Protestant Reformation.
> 
> The Fathers' theology was still in development. However, Wilson has _rejected _sound Reformed theology - see his book - "Reformed is not enough". I also cannot help but think they would have censured someone who wrote a pornographic book about a sex robot like Wilson has - "Ride Sally Ride".
> 
> The primary draw toward him is the same draw as to non-Christians like Ben Shapiro and other 'culture warriors'.


Sex robot huh?


----------



## kodos

No one said:


> Sex robot huh?



I would like to say I am joking. It takes a tremendous amount of spiritual blindness to not see the man for what he is.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## No one

kodos said:


> I would like to say I am joking. It takes a tremendous amount of spiritual blindness to not see the man for what he is.


One more question what is patriarchism? I hear this alot in connection with him?


----------



## No one

Contra_Mundum said:


> DW is a charmer, a charismatic personality type who knows how to gather a following; which is how he took over leadership of the church he attended, and made himself a pastor; and afterward, successfully brought in other churches to join his "federation," in which he continues as the top-dog. DW is not accountable the way pastors in an actual P&R denomination are--not to the elders of his congregation, not to a wider church. All the constituents of his federation are essentially independent churches, most of whom baptize babies and practice paedo-communion. So, the setup is functionally little different from a Baptist convention, plus sacraments. Except...
> 
> Most RBs won't sanction one of their own who is self-ordained. And yet, because they can identify a degree of separation from DW--"He isn't one of us, but more of a presbyterian"--they think to themselves, "His ordination issues are a problem for his own kind to deal with. We like his cultural polemics, his salty dialog." DWs own congregants consider him to be their pastor, so in the eyes of that all-important group _he occupies the office_. Then, he has all those sister-churches who recognize him, so they functionally regard this self-made pastor as a legitimate minister.
> 
> If you see it in a certain light: isn't that what denominations are about? Fellow churches and churchmen who regard one another as legitimate churches and ministers? That may be what it looks like from the perspective of Independency, but not from inside a properly constituted, organized P&R denomination. Men are called to the ministry by the church, not by themselves. The church recognizes and ordains a man to the office. They tell the rest of the church, "We're putting our stamp of approval on this man, and if you regard our judgment as anything you should feel safe regarding him as we do." Yet, we see ministers and congregations even within the P&R world granting DW the place of *teacher*; not just a dispenser of knowledge, but a spiritual guide for the immature and ignorant.
> 
> This is, frankly, madness. But when you ADD to that massive red-flag waving right out of the gate: all the rest of the aberrant theology, the pastoral misconduct, the coarseness of his tongue, his appalling reputation among outsiders (1Tim.3:7), etc.--it is clear that what attracts people to him is not theological care and precision, or the gentleness and pure spiritual greatness and mediatorial authority of Jesus whom he claims to represent. To have and project that is not a matter of charisma, but of calling. When RBs and P&Rs simply grant DW a platform, formally or informally, they are crediting him with authority he only has _from them, _whether they think he has his from Christ or not. Thus they validate him in the eyes of their brethren.


What hai reputation like among outsiders?


----------



## Contra_Mundum

No one said:


> What hai reputation like among outsiders?


Just get to reading the resources already posted, for instance at #5 above. I'm confident you'll have your answer before long.


----------



## JH

Thank you contra and kodos for your mature advice, I expected this thread to go much differently. Glad to know there are still sound spiritual fathers on this board.


----------



## arapahoepark

No one said:


> One more question what is patriarchism? I hear this alot in connection with him?


Patriarchy/patriarchalism?

Basically, rather extreme views of male headship and strict sex roles.


----------



## Ben Mordecai

DW is a polarizing figure like Donald Trump:

People who oppose Trump do so outlandishly, far beyond what is reasonable.
The people who oppose Trump are rarely genuinely upset about the specific criticism they make in the moment, but just venting general opposition to everything about him
Trump was absolutely the right person for the time and regardless of your thoughts on him, if you don't see why he was needed you are part of the problem
I wouldn't want to get my whole life philosophy from Trump despite him being pretty good on most points

Reactions: Like 3 | Sad 1


----------



## A.Joseph

Ben Mordecai said:


> DW is a polarizing figure like Donald Trump:
> 
> People who oppose Trump do so outlandishly, far beyond what is reasonable.
> The people who oppose Trump are rarely genuinely upset about the specific criticism they make in the moment, but just venting general opposition to everything about him
> Trump was absolutely the right person for the time and regardless of your thoughts on him, if you don't see why he was needed you are part of the problem
> I wouldn't want to get my whole life philosophy from Trump despite him being pretty good on most points


There is a 3rd way. Most here fit in that category.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## kodos

Ben Mordecai said:


> DW is a polarizing figure like Donald Trump:
> 
> People who oppose Trump do so outlandishly, far beyond what is reasonable.
> The people who oppose Trump are rarely genuinely upset about the specific criticism they make in the moment, but just venting general opposition to everything about him
> Trump was absolutely the right person for the time and regardless of your thoughts on him, if you don't see why he was needed you are part of the problem
> I wouldn't want to get my whole life philosophy from Trump despite him being pretty good on most points



This post proves the point made earlier. To equate Wilson to Trump shows that his draw is mostly about the culture war.

Officers in the church (which Doug Wilson does a pretty good imitation of) are held to a higher standard than politicians.

Romans 16:17-18, "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple."

Or James 3:1, "My brethren, be not many masters [teachers], knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation."

Reactions: Like 12


----------



## VictorBravo

kodos said:


> Officers in the church (which Doug Wilson does a pretty good imitation of) are held to a higher standard than politicians.


Well said, Rom. And it should be enough said.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## VictorBravo

MODERATION

Just a reminder folks--stay out of political discussion on this thread!

(I almost jumped in myself....)


----------



## Ben Mordecai

It is astonishing to me that people here have the attitude that we are allowed to not fight the culture war. Fighting the culture was is not a character flaw but actually a demonstration of courage. I take very little stock in the rebukes of someone criticizing the methods of the fight who is not in the fight themselves.

Reactions: Like 5


----------



## retroGRAD3

kodos said:


> I would like to say I am joking. It takes a tremendous amount of spiritual blindness to not see the man for what he is.


I am not saying it cannot be criticized, but the book is about a man who destroyed someone else's sex robot and was then put on trial for murder (speaking to the direction of insanity that society is headed). It still may not be an appropriate topic, but we should not straw man either.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## kodos

retroGRAD3 said:


> I am not saying it cannot be criticized, but the book is about a man who destroyed someone else's sex robot and was then put on trial for murder (speaking to the direction of insanity that society is headed). It still may not be an appropriate topic, but we should not straw man either.



Once again. The man claims to be a minister of God. If you have read excerpts of the language he uses - you should be reminded of the Scripture and find it utterly incompatible with the conduct of a Christian man. "Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers." (Eph. 4:29)

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## kodos

Ben Mordecai said:


> It is astonishing to me that people here have the attitude that we are allowed to not fight the culture war. Fighting the culture was is not a character flaw but actually a demonstration of courage. I take very little stock in the rebukes of someone criticizing the methods of the fight who is not in the fight themselves.



That is a step too far. No one says you are not allowed to fight the 'culture war'. Fight it with the means the Lord has given us. Do not run to Assyria or Egypt.

As for rebukes, I simply highlighted the plain teaching of the Word - "Mark and avoid".

Reactions: Like 3 | Love 1


----------



## Ben Mordecai

kodos said:


> Once again. The man claims to be a minister of God. If you have read excerpts of the language he uses - you should be reminded of the Scripture and find it utterly incompatible with the conduct of a Christian man. "Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers." (Eph. 4:29)


I have read what Doug Wilson says and I find nothing wrong with his speech. Most of it is cited maliciously with the direct intent of misrepresenting what he says, and his biggest critics are not our friends.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ben Mordecai

When Aimee Byrd doxxed Genevan Commons, she included a screenshot of Paul Barth saying, "Horse face is mean. She’s a whore. That’s what she is." Some people thought that he was speaking of Aimee. Others realized (correctly) he was speaking of Stormy Daniels and assumed that he was insulting her and making fun of her face. Paul got his reputation raked through the coals by feminists, many of whom are the same people leading the charge against Doug Wilson.

The actual truth of the matter is that the original context was that Donald Trump called his false accuser Stormy Daniels "horse face." Paul was commenting, "horse face is mean" (stating that Trump was wrong to call her horse-face). But then reiterating that it's not wrong to call her a whore, because she literally does have sex for money. 

But now anyone who has an agenda against Paul has ammo they can use against him, since if you were not familiar with the situation is reflects poorly on him.

This is what happens to everyone who engages in the culture wars. It also has happened to Doug Wilson. I am not a supporter of the Federal Vision affiliations but even that is complicated. I just think that the rebukes of Doug Wilson are either mainly from ignorance or else done by hostile interpreters.

Reactions: Like 2 | Informative 1


----------



## A.Joseph

Ben Mordecai said:


> It is astonishing to me that people here have the attitude that we are allowed to not fight the culture war. Fighting the culture was is not a character flaw but actually a demonstration of courage. I take very little stock in the rebukes of someone criticizing the methods of the fight who is not in the fight themselves.


You shouldnt be so shocked.... "Machen himself believed that the church should be intolerant. But the kind of intolerance he advocated was theological, not political. He believed that the church’s primary task was to proclaim the Gospel, and that this task required careful attention to theology. In fact, the Presbyterian Church’s witness was circumscribed by the Westminster Confession. A Presbyterian minister’s ordination vows prohibited him from preaching anything contrary to the confession. But when it came to public matters, Machen recommended the course of civil liberty." https://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/j-gresham-machen-the-politically-incorrect-fundamentalist/


----------



## J.L. Allen

No one said:


> One more question what is patriarchism? I hear this alot in connection with him?





arapahoepark said:


> Patriarchy/patriarchalism?
> 
> Basically, rather extreme views of male headship and strict sex roles.


Respectfully, I don't believe this is an accurate assessment of patriarchy and the "ism" that is associated with it. Yes, it bristles the modern mind, but it can and very often is practiced by men and women with reverence and love for the Lord. Complementarianism is said to be the via media between egalitarianism and patriarchalism, yet it seems to be failing. Those who count themselves as hard complementarians are probably more closely aligned with a patriarchal view. Just because something has been abused, doesn't mean it is actually rotten in its true form and core.

I can't speak to DW regarding it, and maybe someone else can, for I tend to stay away from him and the FV views as much as possible.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Romans922

Ben Mordecai said:


> When Aimee Byrd doxxed Genevan Commons, she included a screenshot of Paul Barth saying, "Horse face is mean. She’s a whore. That’s what she is." Some people thought that he was speaking of Aimee. Others realized (correctly) he was speaking of Stormy Daniels and assumed that he was insulting her and making fun of her face. Paul got his reputation raked through the coals by feminists, many of whom are the same people leading the charge against Doug Wilson.
> 
> The actual truth of the matter is that the original context was that Donald Trump called his false accuser Stormy Daniels "horse face." Paul was commenting, "horse face is mean" (stating that Trump was wrong to call her horse-face). But then reiterating that it's not wrong to call her a whore, because she literally does have sex for money.
> 
> But now anyone who has an agenda against Paul has ammo they can use against him, since if you were not familiar with the situation is reflects poorly on him.
> 
> This is what happens to everyone who engages in the culture wars. It also has happened to Doug Wilson. I am not a supporter of the Federal Vision affiliations but even that is complicated. I just think that the rebukes of Doug Wilson are either mainly from ignorance or else done by hostile interpreters.


Well here you are interacting with people who oppose Aimee Byrd and who oppose Doug Wilson. Now what will you do? Seriously, no one is saying not to address the culture. What we are saying and at least what I am saying that since 2005 I have studied Doug Wilson, and over that time he has only proven himself to be a false teacher, a deceiver, a divider, one who speaks out of both sides of his mouth, someone who poses as a minister but is not one, someone who engages culture and that many YRR types love but not with the means that God has given us but those things that seem 'cool' 'awesome' and attract attention. Those who continually defend him, espouse him, etc. are breaking God's commandment. The Lord says, "Rom 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. 18For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple."

Reactions: Like 6 | Sad 1


----------



## Ben Mordecai

A.Joseph said:


> You shouldnt be so shocked.... "Machen himself believed that the church should be intolerant. But the kind of intolerance he advocated was theological, not political. He believed that the church’s primary task was to proclaim the Gospel, and that this task required careful attention to theology. In fact, the Presbyterian Church’s witness was circumscribed by the Westminster Confession. A Presbyterian minister’s ordination vows prohibited him from preaching anything contrary to the confession. But when it came to public matters, Machen recommended the course of civil liberty." https://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/j-gresham-machen-the-politically-incorrect-fundamentalist/


We are not dealing with a civil liberty scenario. We are dealing with a total global takeover of a homogenized antichrist culture. They're taking kids and cutting off their genitals and removing custody from parents who stop them. They are now buying up all the world's farmland and homes. 

The church doesn't lack dudes who can read and apply covenant theology. It lacks men who understand the times and have the courage to fight.

Reactions: Like 3 | Informative 1


----------



## Andrew35

Romans922 said:


> well for one you have this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He’s been known to lie and be deceptive. As well when you critique his position he often just attacks you as a person instead of interacting with the critique. But his interactions now with Doug Wilson only show that his theology is flawed. As you can see with the others who have stated what they have about Doug Wilson and his false theology.


White makes me sad.

I listened to the DL for many years (since 2006, maybe?), and learned a great deal from him. He's sharp, gifted, and entertaining. His stuff on Mormonism, Islam, and cults has been hugely helpful to me.

Over the past few years, though, I've sensed a trajectory taking him somewhere I didn't want to go, and eventually stopped listening.

Reactions: Like 2 | Sad 1


----------



## A.Joseph

Ben Mordecai said:


> We are not dealing with a civil liberty scenario. We are dealing with a total global takeover of a homogenized antichrist culture. They're taking kids and cutting off their genitals and removing custody from parents who stop them. They are now buying up all the world's farmland and homes.
> 
> The church doesn't lack dudes who can read and apply covenant theology. It lacks men who understand the times and have the courage to fight.


And you dont see how the essentials can be compromised?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ben Mordecai

Romans922 said:


> Well here you are interacting with people who oppose Aimee Byrd and who oppose Doug Wilson. Now what will you do? Seriously, no one is saying not to address the culture. What we are saying and at least what I am saying that since 2005 I have studied Doug Wilson, and over that time he has only proven himself to be a false teacher, a deceiver, a divider, one who speaks out of both sides of his mouth, someone who poses as a minister but is not one, someone who engages culture and that many YRR types love but not with the means that God has given us but those things that seem 'cool' 'awesome' and attract attention. Those who continually defend him, espouse him, etc. are breaking God's commandment. The Lord says, "Rom 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. 18For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple."


This reminds me when you started kicking people out of the covenanters facebook group who so much as mentioned Doug Wilson, and when confronted about it were told "do your own research."

Reactions: Wow 1


----------



## VictorBravo

Ben Mordecai said:


> This reminds me when you started kicking people out of the covenanters facebook group who so much as mentioned Doug Wilson


MODERATION

Stop the personal attacks. Stop importing controversies from other forums.

And stop imputing broadbrush motives to everyone who has some sense of disagreement with your view.

Reactions: Like 3 | Amen 2


----------



## A.Joseph

Romans922 said:


> Well here you are interacting with people who oppose Aimee Byrd and who oppose Doug Wilson. Now what will you do? Seriously, no one is saying not to address the culture. What we are saying and at least what I am saying that since 2005 I have studied Doug Wilson, and over that time he has only proven himself to be a false teacher, a deceiver, a divider, one who speaks out of both sides of his mouth, someone who poses as a minister but is not one, someone who engages culture and that many YRR types love but not with the means that God has given us but those things that seem 'cool' 'awesome' and attract attention. Those who continually defend him, espouse him, etc. are breaking God's commandment. The Lord says, "Rom 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. 18For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple."


Exactly. False equivalency. I can cringe at GC and DW and still consider AB wholly disqualified as a biblical instructor/expositor. There's no team or side. 

We see what's coming and want to remain focused and grounded. Not distracted.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ben Mordecai

A.Joseph said:


> Exactly. False equivalency. I can cringe at GC and DW and still consider AB wholly disqualified as a biblical instructor/expositor. There's no team or side.
> 
> We see what's coming and want to remain focused and grounded. Not distracted.


Exactly what has been said about the PCA for 10 years and we have been told not to worry and to stay focused. 

It's all 11th commandment. "Thou shalt always be nice." Zero fight. Zero urgency.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## nickipicki123



Reactions: Like 3


----------



## retroGRAD3

Andrew35 said:


> White makes me sad.
> 
> I listened to the DL for many years (since 2006, maybe?), and learned a great deal from him. He's sharp, gifted, and entertaining. His stuff on Mormonism, Islam, and cults has been hugely helpful to me.
> 
> Over the past few years, though, I've sensed a trajectory taking him somewhere I didn't want to go, and eventually stopped listening.


Still seems good to me. He clarified the comments on this video as well, on the next one he put up.

Reactions: Love 1


----------



## nickipicki123

Look up the case of Steven Sitler...

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## VictorBravo

The thread is about Wison. Keep it to the topic.

DW wants us to cheer his zeal for the Lord.

Just like Jehu.

Reactions: Like 3 | Sad 1


----------



## A.Joseph

Ben Mordecai said:


> Exactly what has been said about the PCA for 10 years and we have been told not to worry and to stay focused.
> 
> It's all 11th commandment. "Thou shalt always be nice." Zero fight. Zero urgency.


I think others could speak about that trajectory and the various variables at play. Im sure you are simplifying things to make your case, not purposely .....


----------



## RamistThomist

Sitler is why Wilson is such a dangerous pastor.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Andrew35

retroGRAD3 said:


> Still seems good to me. He clarified the comments on this video as well, on the next one he put up.


He got too fixated on the culture wars, among other things.

Which, to my mind, is what brought him into co-belligerency with DW. (See? I brought it back to topic.  )

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Stephen L Smith

BayouHuguenot said:


> Sitler is why Wilson is such a dangerous pastor.


Can you expand? I speak as one troubled by Wilson but I realise my knowledge of the situation is limited. Feel free to discuss the relationship between Wilson and Sitler; keep to the moderators requests though.


----------



## Ben Mordecai

I just got hit with a moderation warning from this thread. Enjoy the groupthink.

Reactions: Like 1 | Sad 1


----------



## retroGRAD3

Andrew35 said:


> He got too fixated on the culture wars, among other things.
> 
> Which, to my mind, is what brought him into co-belligerency with DW. (See? I brought it back to topic.  )


Final comment, because I realize mine are more about White, but I think one of the reasons all this CRT nonsense is cropping up is because not enough churches are addressing the culture war. The worldly culture is winning and many churches are turning woke. To me, he seems to be doing both. Talking about the culture and still doing good apologetics.

Reactions: Like 2 | Love 1 | Edifying 1


----------



## Andrew35

Ben Mordecai said:


> I just got hit with a moderation warning from this thread. Enjoy the groupthink.


I've done worse things in groups than think...

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ben Mordecai

retroGRAD3 said:


> Final comment, because I realize mine are more about White, but I think one of the reasons all this CRT nonsense is cropping up is because not enough churches are addressing the culture war. The worldly culture is winning and many churches are turning woke. To me, he seems to be doing both. Talking about the culture and still doing good apologetics.


Exactly right. If anyone is mad that a guy who is Federal Vision adjacent is becoming popular addressing the culture wars, let that be a rebuke on the rest of the reformed world for not doing it.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Andrew35

retroGRAD3 said:


> Final comment, because I realize mine are more about White, but I think one of the reasons all this CRT nonsense is cropping up is because not enough churches are addressing the culture war. The worldly culture is winning and many churches are turning woke. To me, he seems to be doing both. Talking about the culture and still doing good apologetics.


I'm very much involved in the culture war.

Carl Trueman is good on the culture war. John McWhorter is good on the culture war. Freddie DeBoer and Scott Alexander are good on the culture war (though from the other side).

James White and Doug Wilson are not.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## RamistThomist

Stephen L Smith said:


> Can you expand? I speak as one troubled by Wilson but I realise my knowledge of the situation is limited. Feel free to discuss the relationship between Wilson and Sitler; keep to the moderators requests though.











Steven Sitler Archive


The Truth About Moscow




sitler.moscowid.net

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## nickipicki123

You can engage in the culture war and still be wrong.

Reactions: Like 8


----------



## retroGRAD3

Andrew35 said:


> I'm very much involved in the culture war.
> 
> Carl Trueman is good on the culture war. John McWhorter is good on the culture war. Freddie DeBoer and Scott Alexander are good on the culture war (though from the other side).
> 
> James White and Doug Wilson are not.


I disagree with you on James White, but can accept you have a different opinion.

Reactions: Like 3 | Amen 1


----------



## A.Joseph

retroGRAD3 said:


> Final comment, because I realize mine are more about White, but I think one of the reasons all this CRT nonsense is cropping up is because not enough churches are addressing the culture war. The worldly culture is winning and many churches are turning woke. To me, he seems to be doing both. Talking about the culture and still doing good apologetics.


That's where the money is.....

The problem is the leadership. Take it up with them. Concentrate your concerns. 

White can only control what he can control and he may be getting distracted. Action can only be had starting at the local levels. Nothing is going to happen overnight. He's letting desperation get the best of him. CRT money is pouring in and they get the press. It's everywhere and even the church is not immune. 

Doug Wilson is who he is..... If we embrace Doug Wilson, do we win the war? Im not so sure. I think he may ultimately be a liability.


----------



## Ethan

I fail to see how the popularity of culture warriors espousing aberrant theology is a rebuke to reformed theology. For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions (2 Tim. 4:3)

Reactions: Like 6


----------



## JM

I take Wilson for what he is and enjoy the delivery of his podcasts. I've read some of his books as well and find him helpful BUT this is the Puritan Board and it has rules that encourage us all to strive for a confessional understanding of the faith so I never mentioned you know who. I believe a lot of people on this forum lurkers included listen and read you know who but understand that we must all play by the rules here and just keep it to ourselves.

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1


----------



## No one

Andrew35 said:


> White makes me sad.
> 
> I listened to the DL for many years (since 2006, maybe?), and learned a great deal from him. He's sharp, gifted, and entertaining. His stuff on Mormonism, Islam, and cults has been hugely helpful to me.
> 
> Over the past few years, though, I've sensed a trajectory taking him somewhere I didn't want to go, and eventually stopped listening.


Really, what trajectory?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ben Mordecai

It's not confessional faithfulness to break the positive requirements of the 10 commandments by tolerating all the rampant behavior that gets categorized as culture wars.


----------



## ZackF

A Doug Wilson thread that is still open at 45 posts!

Reactions: Funny 9


----------



## Eyedoc84

VictorBravo said:


> DW wants us to cheer his zeal for the Lord


Can you add context to this statement?


----------



## NaphtaliPress

I think that's enough of this.


----------



## VictorBravo

Eyedoc84 said:


> Can you add context to this statement?


Sure, but I was drawing on what was posted already.

Douglas Wilson obviously likes to gather an audience. He uses techniques and wordplay in such a way as to shock, all for what he wants us to think of as a good cause.

The general message over the years comes across, to me at least, as:

"Let's attack the reprobate culture." 
"Let's do it using their own techniques against them." 
"On the way, let's offend people, because we have liberty."

And, "if we offend other Christians, their cowardice is the problem."

Jehu, of course, said, "come see my zeal for the Lord." He ended up killing all the house of Ahab. God commended him for this.

But:

2Ki 10:31 But Jehu took no heed to walk in the law of the LORD God of Israel with all his heart: for he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam, which made Israel to sin.

Reactions: Like 6


----------



## VictorBravo

Sorry, Chris, cross-posted.


----------

