# Doug Phillips



## LadyFlynt

Here it is:

What problem do any of you have with Doug Phillips? Curious. Also explain any parts where you are in agreement with him, please. Trying to understand due to terms such as "hyper Phillipism" and "hyper Uniting Church and Home".


----------



## Coram Deo

Unlike Jonathan Lindvall or Doug Wilson, All who I have problems with. Doug Phillips I am ok with. He does not seem to be in any heresy. He might be abit Idealistic since his upbringing with his father was wonderful and great. He tends to think that since his relationship with his father was great that they must all be like that. Forgetting that the fathers can sin greatly too.. But his principles are good. Of all the Patriarchal advocates out there Doug Phillips and Mark Chanski of Holland Reformed Baptist Church of Michigan are the best.

Michael



LadyFlynt said:


> Here it is:
> 
> What problem do any of you have with Doug Phillips? Curious. Also explain any parts where you are in agreement with him, please. Trying to understand due to terms such as "hyper Phillipism" and "hyper Uniting Church and Home".


----------



## jenney

*Subjectivity Warning! Whoop! Whoop!*

I just don't like his _catalog_ very much!

It comes across as pompous to me and seems to have a sort of siege mentality.

I don't like how all the fun stuff is in the "boy" section: old coins, zip lines, rockets and shooters, etc. The "girl" section is full of pewter sewing kits and tea sets. Now, my girls love dolls and tea, but we also love to camp, hike and shoot at things! And the girl stuff isn't super practical or fun for the most part. It just seems to be decorative.

I know that is just totally subjective, but i can't help that whenever I get one of those VF catalogs I have to roll my eyes at the little boy all dressed up in some $120 colonial soldier outfit complete with tri-cornered hat and drum defending his sister's honor. Like the world was a lovely place before indoor plumbing and if only we could return to those noble days, we'd all have big families that happily cavort in a pastoral meadow during an eternal springtime. I find myself half expecting for it to say that we can "live forever in paradise on earth"!

Honestly I know nothing about his doctrine. I figure he's reformed and baptistic, but I don't know. I'm just really turned off by his catalog.

It seems odd that I wouldn't like him: I'm a conservative, reformed, credobaptist, homeschooling mom of six children in my mid-thirties. Don't I seem like their precise demographic?  

I'm curious why some people really dislike him, too, because there seems to be some anti-phillips vitriol around here that must have a doctrinal root, not just hokey feelings like mine!


----------



## Coram Deo

He is aleast Reformed Baptist....  



jenney said:


> I just don't like his _catalog_ very much!
> 
> It comes across as pompous to me and seems to have a sort of siege mentality.
> 
> I don't like how all the fun stuff is in the "boy" section: old coins, zip lines, rockets and shooters, etc. The "girl" section is full of pewter sewing kits and tea sets. Now, my girls love dolls and tea, but we also love to camp, hike and shoot at things! And the girl stuff isn't super practical or fun for the most part. It just seems to be decorative.
> 
> I know that is just totally subjective, but i can't help that whenever I get one of those VF catalogs I have to roll my eyes at the little boy all dressed up in some $120 colonial soldier outfit complete with tri-cornered hat and drum defending his sister's honor. Like the world was a lovely place before indoor plumbing and if only we could return to those noble days, we'd all have big families that happily cavort in a pastoral meadow during an eternal springtime. I find myself half expecting for it to say that we can "live forever in paradise on earth"!
> 
> Honestly I know nothing about his doctrine. I figure he's reformed and baptistic, but I don't know. I'm just really turned off by his catalog.
> 
> It seems odd that I wouldn't like him: I'm a conservative, reformed, credobaptist, homeschooling mom of six children in my mid-thirties. Don't I seem like their precise demographic?
> 
> I'm curious why some people really dislike him, too, because there seems to be some anti-phillips vitriol around here that must have a doctrinal root, not just hokey feelings like mine!


----------



## LadyFlynt

I LOVE the pewter sewing kits! (but I also like shotguns!)


----------



## KMK

Vision Forum rocks!


----------



## Casey

jenney said:


> I just don't like his _catalog_ very much!
> 
> It comes across as pompous to me and seems to have a sort of siege mentality.
> 
> I don't like how all the fun stuff is in the "boy" section: old coins, zip lines, rockets and shooters, etc. The "girl" section is full of pewter sewing kits and tea sets. Now, my girls love dolls and tea, but we also love to camp, hike and shoot at things! And the girl stuff isn't super practical or fun for the most part. It just seems to be decorative.
> 
> I know that is just totally subjective, but i can't help that whenever I get one of those VF catalogs I have to roll my eyes at the little boy all dressed up in some $120 colonial soldier outfit complete with tri-cornered hat and drum defending his sister's honor. Like the world was a lovely place before indoor plumbing and if only we could return to those noble days, we'd all have big families that happily cavort in a pastoral meadow during an eternal springtime. I find myself half expecting for it to say that we can "live forever in paradise on earth"!
> 
> Honestly I know nothing about his doctrine. I figure he's reformed and baptistic, but I don't know. I'm just really turned off by his catalog.
> 
> It seems odd that I wouldn't like him: I'm a conservative, reformed, credobaptist, homeschooling mom of six children in my mid-thirties. Don't I seem like their precise demographic?
> 
> I'm curious why some people really dislike him, too, because there seems to be some anti-phillips vitriol around here that must have a doctrinal root, not just hokey feelings like mine!


I've seen a few of his catalogs and this post of yours pretty well sums up my exact reaction to them, too! You may think it's merely a subjective observation, but I don't think it's so subjective. Those silly pictures on the cover are a clear picture of the "agenda" behind the products they sell. To be sure, doctrinally, I don't know much about him. But those images (and you know they aren't limited to the cover) throw up all sorts of red flags in my mind for the reasons you've already mentioned.


----------



## LadyFlynt

So the problem is the idea that the world was perfect before plumbing or the ideal of men as protectors and women as ladies?

I agree that we shouldn't have rose coloured glasses. The world was just as criminal then as it is now. Nothing new under the sun. But the picture is in the ideals that were held by the Christians of the time. That's what I believe they are aiming for.


----------



## satz

Please note I am only answering this post because I happen to have some minutes to spare and I saw this on the forum… There are some things that VF teaches I disagree with, but I would not harass those who chose to live that way. 

I believe Doug Phillips and Vision Forum have a lot of good things to say, especially in light of where the unbelieving world is going.

That said I believe some of what they teach on family and gender roles is merely conservative as opposed to truly biblical and while some may not mind this overreaction because of the way the world is going, yet it is still no justification to go beyond scripture. I believe in patriarchy in that God created this as a man's world and he put a man in charge of it, and that the bible emphasizes the role and authority of men in society and the church. I don't agree with *Patriarchy*, as Mr Phillips, and most of the christians who chose to specifically identify their ministries by that name, would define it. 

I agree with Jenney that the whole colonial American thing can be off putting to some believers. I know that they are not, in any way shape or form promoting a you must be American to be christian kind of deal, and they are not wrong to provide these things for Amercians who want to appreciate their heritage, but the emphasis they place of these things still detracts to an extent from their being a ministry that is focuses solely on what the bible teaches.

I am also not keen on the whole idea that they (and many others I might add) promote about the Christian duty to ‘take dominion over the earth’. Yes, Adam was told that, but that language was never repeated in the Law of Moses or in any of the Epistles. The New Testament addresses work five times (Eph, Col, Timothy, Titus, 1 Peter) and never brings up ‘taking dominion’ over the earth as something to be sought after in a christian’s work. Diligent service of a Master is what the New Testament emphasis on work is about. I know this is a minor and nitpicking point, but I think the language is unfortunate and sometimes confuses Christians who are wondering what sought of work they ought to pursue.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Thanks for responding, Mark. That was very insightful. If you have time to check back, could explain what you believe the differences are between Biblical Patriarchy and Phillips' (and like company) Patriarchy?


----------



## satz

Colleen,

I'am leaving for church soon (its Sunday over in this part of the world) I'll try to respond as soon as possible.


----------



## LadyFlynt

The catch 22 I see them in, and have been in myself, is the conflict of the first two items. They will either influence in some way or be run off by the church. Granted, they be permitted to follow their conscience, but when they are the few within the church, then there is the pressure for them or their children to conform with the rest of the congregation...thus, they are left with no other choice than to seek like-minded believers. If they influence, which many times happens simply by their presence or others asking them questions, then they are seen as trouble makers. On the reverse, I do understand and have seen extremists that attempt to form a coup (Gothardites).


----------



## kvanlaan

This is the first time I've seen any of his stuff and I think the catalog is _totally_ cool. If I had the disposable income, I'd love for my daughters to have the pewter sewing kit scissors hanging around their neck (with a .410/.22 over/under slung on their shoulders.) 

I sort of like the idea of implanting those gender roles in the girls. It means that the world will have to take that much longer to beat them into the goddess/diva mindset. For the boys too; my boys are going to have the "protect your sisters' honour" bit hammered into them quite thoroughly.

I love the roles and ideals, but to hold those ideals without the benefit of indoor plumbing _scares_ me.


----------



## tewilder

I have an number of things by Doug Phillips on my website in the Spanish section. The reason is that the translator found them and picked them as something he wanted to do. 

I ask him why. It turns out that Phillips is the antidote to the major problem in Latin American churches, namely that the pastor is everything and the father is nothing, and the fathers only role is to get the family members to church and into all the programs run under the pastor's authority, which is where all the true Christianity is.

So it is an emphasis that corrects another emphasis. 

But I have to admit that if I came across a community that actually lived like in those catalogs, I would run away screaming.


----------



## turmeric

It sounds like _The Village._


----------



## RamistThomist

Just take the good and leave the bad. Most people want an "all or nothing" approach. 

I think the catalogue rocks. Boys training to be manly (even if they overdo it). His Witherspoon series is phenomenal. You can learn more theology and politics there than....I won't finish the sentence. 

He is a good antidote to wimpishness. Sure he messes up. So what? We're big kids here (most, anyway) and should have discernment. I find him refreshing on a number of levels. I disagree with him on a number of points, too. Big deal.


----------



## RamistThomist

Everybody seems to get nervous if so and so doesn't toe the "line of orthodoxy" (always vague and undefined). I used to be like this. But I think Phillips is refreshing, and even when he is wrong, he is refreshingly wrong. 

I mean, pretend you are at the mall on Friday night and you see these girls dressed in a way that would make swimsuit models blush. They have earings coming out of their arms, they look like female lucifers and you think, "Is this what the world has come to?"

Then you go home and see girls dressing like ladies and everything looks so wholesome. That's refreshing. We might not like everything Phillips does, but there are worse ways to go wrong with your kids and we can't fault him on that. 

PS: He was also very gracious with his time and set aside a few moments to speak with me when he didn't have to.


----------



## RamistThomist

satz said:


> I am also not keen on the whole idea that they (and many others I might add) promote about the Christian duty to ‘take dominion over the earth’. Yes, Adam was told that, but that language was never repeated in the Law of Moses or in any of the Epistles. The New Testament addresses work five times (Eph, Col, Timothy, Titus, 1 Peter) and never brings up ‘taking dominion’ over the earth as something to be sought after in a christian’s work.



That's the fallacy of argument from silence. Its like saying the apostle Paul didn't believe in the Virgin Birth because he never mentions it. Now, some could be overdoing it in the dominion area (I rather doubt it) and a possible critique could be made, but not using this kind of logic.


----------



## satz

Draught Horse said:


> That's the fallacy of argument from silence. Its like saying the apostle Paul didn't believe in the Virgin Birth because he never mentions it. Now, some could be overdoing it in the dominion area (I rather doubt it) and a possible critique could be made, but not using this kind of logic.



I see where you are coming from, but I don't see it as being strictly an argument from silence. It is not that the bible is silent about man's work. It mentions it five times in the NT, and innumerable times in Proverbs and not once is the idea of taking dominion over the earth mentioned. If I am wrong I would be grateful to see the verse. I do not deny that mankind is still in dominion over the earth. I don't see how the bible tells christians to make it an issue in our individual lives and choices.


----------



## RamistThomist

I don't have to produce the verse. The bible says it in a foundational chapter. I do not accept the quasi-dispensational view that something must be specifically repeated in the NT for it to be binding.


----------



## satz

Draught Horse said:


> I don't have to produce the verse. The bible says it in a foundational chapter. I do not accept the quasi-dispensational view that something must be specifically repeated in the NT for it to be binding.



OK, Fair enough. Could you then please humour me and in the name of being ready always to give an answer give me a short explaination of how you think this prinicple should play out in the life of a christian person?


----------



## RamistThomist

As images of God we are called to image God to the world. Our labor is to be done to the glory of God. All facts bear witness to God. They are already God-interpreted facts and we are to be receptively-reconstructive in how we re-interpret these God-interpreted facts. 

As to how it plays out in every specific situation, I don't know. I haven't experienced every specific situation fathomable to man. It would look different for different people. 

By "taking dominion" I do not mean having 20 babies, teaching them knitting and log-cutting, and passing that down to the next generation. Taking dominion is to see how the Christian faith informs and transforms my work-environment, my community, etc.


----------



## satz

Draught Horse said:


> As images of God we are called to image God to the world. Our labor is to be done to the glory of God. All facts bear witness to God. They are already God-interpreted facts and we are to be receptively-reconstructive in how we re-interpret these God-interpreted facts.
> 
> As to how it plays out in every specific situation, I don't know. I haven't experienced every specific situation fathomable to man. It would look different for different people.
> 
> By "taking dominion" I do not mean having 20 babies, teaching them knitting and log-cutting, and passing that down to the next generation. Taking dominion is to see how the Christian faith informs and transforms my work-environment, my community, etc.



Alright, thanks.

For what its worth, the having 20 babies thing was never what I had in mind.


----------



## RamistThomist

satz said:


> Alright, thanks.
> 
> For what its worth, the having 20 babies thing was never what I had in mind.



I know. I was trying to be funny. I had a lot of folks, reformed folks where I went to school, make fun of me on this point and tried to make me imply that. That's usually what people think.


----------



## satz

LadyFlynt said:


> The catch 22 I see them in, and have been in myself, is the conflict of the first two items. They will either influence in some way or be run off by the church. Granted, they be permitted to follow their conscience, but when they are the few within the church, then there is the pressure for them or their children to conform with the rest of the congregation...thus, they are left with no other choice than to seek like-minded believers. If they influence, which many times happens simply by their presence or others asking them questions, then they are seen as trouble makers. On the reverse, I do understand and have seen extremists that attempt to form a coup (Gothardites).



hmmm...

You know, I think this delimma is to a certain extent indicative of a lack of a proper understanding of christian liberty. Christian liberty entails not only our having freedom in those things God has not commanded (subject to all the restrictions Paul puts on it, of course) but also that we ought to give other christians freedom to do anything they want, that does not violate the bible.

If a family wants to do things a certain way, even if it is 'strange' to the rest of the church, the majority ought to back off and let them do what they want, unless there is sin involved. A proper understanding of christian liberty ought to allow brothers and sisters to coexist in peace in a church even if they differ horribly on many subjects because they should realize that if God has not seen it fit to mandate on a subject, that subject is not worth dividing over.

Of course, all this assumes that the issue is liberty and I guess with regards to these family issues many people will not think the issues are liberty but rather matters of obedience. Although, from the context of your comment, I doubt generally speaking the majority really believes that the minority are sinning by being more conservative on family issues.


----------



## Casey

turmeric said:


> It sounds like _The Village._


----------



## RamistThomist

Also, don't demean Phillips' intellect (not saying anyone is). The man has done an exceptional job in popularizing presuppositional apologetics, 6th day creation, law and public policy. Whether you like him or not or his Vision (no pun), he has a lot to offer.


----------



## Semper Fidelis

Draught Horse said:


> Everybody seems to get nervous if so and so doesn't toe the "line of orthodoxy" (always vague and undefined). I used to be like this. But I think Phillips is refreshing, and even when he is wrong, he is refreshingly wrong.
> 
> I mean, pretend you are at the mall on Friday night and you see these girls dressed in a way that would make swimsuit models blush. They have earings coming out of their arms, they look like female lucifers and you think, "Is this what the world has come to?"
> 
> Then you go home and see girls dressing like ladies and everything looks so wholesome. That's refreshing. We might not like everything Phillips does, but there are worse ways to go wrong with your kids and we can't fault him on that.
> 
> PS: He was also very gracious with his time and set aside a few moments to speak with me when he didn't have to.



I understand what you're saying about being "refreshingly wrong" and why it is popular with many of us who are reacting against the excesses of society.

BUT

There is a very large danger in "refreshing wrongness". It tends to lead people into Pharisaism - the quintessential example of the conservatives calling people back to "traditional values" and away from the wickedness of the pagans surrounding them.

Is Doug Philips a Pharisee? I doubt it. I hardly know his work well enough and it would be sinful of me to call him such. Let's just set that straight.

Nevertheless, he kind of helps feed a movement among some Reformed that I am just not a big fan of. Forgive me if I have to speak in extremes to make my point.

It seems that when I meet people that call themselves Reformed these days out of the blue there are primarily 3 varieties:
1. The kind that went to a PCA in the States and now are completely at ease worshipping at a Calvary Chapel.
2. The kind that think that being a 5-pointer means you're Reformed.
3. The kind that think that getting a farm and living off the land and churning their own butter and teaching their sons to shoot and their daughters to sew is being Reformed.

It's that third category I have in mind here.

I've been around mothers who intend never to educate their daughters past high school because: "...she doesn't need to know anything more than that in order to be a good wife and mother."

Do they have a right to believe this? Sure but this attitude is kind of fed by catalogs that only sell dollies to girls because that's all they're preparing for.

Some Reformed people remind me of the Society for Creative Anachronisms who like to dress up in medieval garb and talk in "Thees" and "Thous" and fight with swords. Instead of doing it for a weekend, though, they want to go out into the countryside and live that way.

And in a lot of cases, many of them are convinced that this is the real sense of what it means to "...take dominion...."

Newsflash: Paul's ministry of evangelism was primarily in urban settings.

I can get along fine with most people but I honestly find some of these movements to be just a little wierd. Too much energy is focused on externals - a girlie doll and not Dora the Explorer.

Yeah, Dora's parents ought to be ashamed of themselves. They let Dora have to get to a soccer game through a dangerous jungle with crocodiles chasing her, Trolls barring her from crossing a bridge, etc. All so she can use her "Super Soccer Kick" to score the winning goal because a bunch of adult players need the help of an 8 year old child.

Got it. Dora's not a great example of what it means to be a kid. When I'm reading the stories to my girl, I embellish them by mentioning that now that she and Diego have rescued the Baby Jaguar and returned him to his family that mommy Jaguar eats Diego and Dora.

"Oh no Rich! You let Anna play with Dora! She's going to be a feminist. She'll hate Christ!"

Says you. The other day. James comes into the room and quietly announces, "I'm Dr. James, come with me...." Anna is lying on the bed with the covers pulled up and Dora laying at her chest. She had just had a baby through her belly button and was "...very tired...."

Look, I don't know if we'll ever get around to teaching Anna and Sophia how to sew. My wife probably knows how to sew as well as I do. I bought her a sewing machine but it's not her thing. Her meal planning has actually improved markedly lately because she found a great website that has a bunch of meals that include what to put on your grocery list.

But you know what: My wife is an outstanding mother and a beautiful Christian woman.

She loves Christ. She respects me. She tries to submit to me. She disciplines her children.

And she has the warmest soul of anyone I've ever met. I can be really mean but everyone loves my wife. She's so nice to everyone.

Oh, and she's actually pretty good with a computer too (married to a computer guy and all).

Yeah, I forgot to mention she has a Master's Degree and won't be under-educated when she's homeschooling our kids through their entire childhoold (if we continue to homeschool).

But we're Suburban or Urbanites. I have no desire to live off the land. I want a fiber connection to the Internet so I can keep this website up for all those people that shun technology but still like to interact on the Internet with others telling them to shun the stuff they're using.

This is a rambling polemic so I'll try to tighten this up in my conclusion:

Our goal in training our children should not be focused on the clothes they wear, the toys they play with, or whether they learn how to shoot and sew. Our focus ought to be on training men to be lovers of Christ, to be providers, to be courageous in their convictions, and to cherish women in preparation for loving a wife as Christ loves the Church. We ought to be training women to guard their hearts, to be excellent in all things, and to never allow a man to woo her that she does not respect as much as Dad or someone who won't love them as much as Dad does.

All the other stuff is nice but the "refreshingly wrong" part of it becomes dangerous because it becomes a point at which some people focus on the externals rather than the heart. Paul's guidance to men and women in the Scriptures doesn't use the words "shotgun, needles, dollies, or fishing" anywhere in the Epistles.


----------



## RamistThomist

Rich,
About half of your post lost me. I have no idea who Dora is. And my refreshingly wrong comment still stands. If someone goes all "movement mentality" then they got issues. I can't answer for them and I really don't care. 

I really don't thnk I will fall prey to such a movement because:
1) I am poor, and movements are expensive. 
2) I am a public school teacher.
3) I live in the suburbs. 

I view his catalogue like anything else. Again, I say, Reformed people awlays want someone to "toe the line" just like them, don't make them "nervous", etc. SO what if we disagree with him? What is someone reads his catalogue, is encouraged to be more manly, and avoids the extremes? Imagine the horrors in the situation. 

And few people have yet commented on the goods his service provides: excellent apologetic and historical lectures, excellent public policy and political resources, etc. 

While Reformed people are arguing apologetic methodology, he is taking "apologetics to the streets."


----------



## Semper Fidelis

Draught Horse said:


> Rich,
> About half of your post lost me. I have no idea who Dora is. And my refreshingly wrong comment still stands. If someone goes all "movement mentality" then they got issues. I can't answer for them and I really don't care.
> 
> I really don't thnk I will fall prey to such a movement because:
> 1) I am poor, and movements are expensive.
> 2) I am a public school teacher.
> 3) I live in the suburbs.
> 
> I view his catalogue like anything else. Again, I say, Reformed people awlays want someone to "toe the line" just like them, don't make them "nervous", etc. SO what if we disagree with him? What is someone reads his catalogue, is encouraged to be more manly, and avoids the extremes? Imagine the horrors in the situation.
> 
> And few people have yet commented on the goods his service provides: excellent apologetic and historical lectures, excellent public policy and political resources, etc.
> 
> While Reformed people are arguing apologetic methodology, he is taking "apologetics to the streets."


Fair enough. I'm in one of the manliest professions imaginable. All I'm saying is that I think that some people think the only way to train such principles is to use the obvious props. The props themselves become the focus. The potential "horror" is that you create a Pharisee. They're nice, respectful people but they are whitewashed sepulchres.

I guess what I see is that this seems so consistent with the "uniform" that many Reformed folk think they need to put on. If he has a great ministry, I would just assume he didn't contribute to phenomena that undermine the other good work you say he does. Many people are not sophisticated to distinguish between the principle and the toys. The form of the toys communicates a (perhaps?) unintended idea.

If the rest of his stuff is great then so be it.


----------



## RamistThomist

I learned more about politics and theology from these series than....well, we won't go there.
Witherspoon DVD collection.
Witherspoon CD collection

I also saw other extreme stuff like the Puritans on the site. 

Now, I will also give a balanced, non-deragotory, non-stereotypical critique of Phillips: I think he is wrong on the Christian Film Festival . I think the the tube as a medium is inherently flawed and subject to the law of diminishing returns.


----------



## RamistThomist

For what its worth, my kids, Lord willing, will more likely play with wooden swords than mind-numbing video games. But in doing so I don't see how I am communicating a dangerous message to them. 



> Many people are not sophisticated to distinguish between the principle and the toys.



Probably, but that doesn't affect me. I mean, I am grieved that they go off that end but I am not responsible for other catalogue readers.

I grant you are in a manly profession. I was mainly talking about me as the guy who became (I hope) more manly.


----------



## Redaimie

I have a question, what authority is Pastor Phillips under? Is he part of any denomination? 

If the answer is no though I would agree with him on some things like the authority men are given over women & the need for women to dress modestly etc, I think he takes some things to extremes that I believe the bible does not. As such I would be hesitant to be under the authority of someone who has no authority over him & who could than enforce discipline that is harsher than what the bible commands. 

Some questions I would ask is would you be disciplined for sending your daughter to college? Would you be disciplined if women wore pants? would you be disciplined if as a woman you worked outside the home? Would you be able to bring a non believer to church & feel they'd be welcome? I don't know what their practice is for sure but I do have reservations from what little I have read.


----------



## RamistThomist

Redaimie said:


> I have a question, what authority is Pastor Phillips under? Is he part of any denomination?



Don't know.



> As such I would be hesitant to be under the authority of someone who has no authority over him & who could than enforce discipline that is harsher than what the bible commands.



I don't think anyone here is wanting to be under his authority. I was just approaching him from the standpoint of "he has cool resources."



> Some questions I would ask is would you be disciplined for sending your daughter to college? Would you be disciplined if women wore pants? would you be disciplined if as a woman you worked outside the home? Would you be able to bring a non believer to church & feel they'd be welcome? I don't know what their practice is for sure but I do have reservations from what little I have read.



I guess if you went to his church, and he was an elder in said church, you would probably have to work those issues out with him. But I don't think anybody here wants to immediately move to his chuch and seek his authority.


----------



## Semper Fidelis

Draught Horse said:


> For what its worth, my kids, Lord willing, will more likely play with wooden swords than mind-numbing video games. But in doing so I don't see how I am communicating a dangerous message to them.
> 
> Probably, but that doesn't affect me. I mean, I am grieved that they go off that end but I am not responsible for other catalogue readers.


Perhaps the difference between you and me, is that I _do_ worry about those who lack discernment. Maybe it's because I've been in the profession that I've been in for so long that it's easy to see the tendency for people who are being exposed to a "manly principle" for the first time to think that they've discovered the essence of discipline and manliness. Reformed people have their "cage stage." Marines have their young Marines with "Death before Dishonour" t-shirts with a skull and two bloody knives. I used to think those t-shirts were cool - about 20 years ago. I just see so much of the externals to be a form of this kind of "uniform".

I don't know what it is in the mind of man that makes him want to go into these kinds of extremes. My only point is that some never grow out of them. I'm not attracted to faux manliness any more than I'm attracted to faux-feminity. Do I prefer to see young ladies in nice dresses as opposed to black with earings all over their faces? Absolutely but it's not as if it's a choice between Grunge and the Society for Creative Anachronisms. Some people can only live in those dichotomies. Take a look at pics of my kids sometimes and see how nicely they're dressed.

I realize that is not your problem. All I'm arguing is that I wish these kinds of people didn't have a another place to "get their fix" because this movement is, in some ways, antithetical to our _priorities_. The catalog, in form, feeds that movement.

Incidentally, my son has a full array of armour and weapons. He can outfit a retinue of tiny warriors with many weapons from many centuries. That's not the point.



> I grant you are in a manly profession. I was mainly talking about me as the guy who became (I hope) more manly.


Good. I have an admission to make: I've learned a lot from Wilson over the years. He speaks in a way I can appreciate and makes some good points about real masculinity and toughness. He was Navy so he only learned so much though. 

But, even before he started moving into the FV, his stuff was fraught with over-statements. I once regretted recommending a book of his to a novice.

I just wish people weren't learning how to be men and women for the first time from books. That's a big part of the problem. When you have a flesh and blood mentor, they can smack you across the head when you're starting to act like a dork. As it is, some never get mentored and remain stuck in a place of stilted development.


----------



## bob

While I do receive the Vision Forum catalogue, my involvment with the organization has been only to order a few books from them. I have read a bit of commentary from the catalogue, but outside of that I really do not have enough informatiuon on the man or the organization to share an opinion. I am aware that there are those who enjoy Vision Forum and those who do not. Nothing is new under the sun, I suppose.

I work as a carpenter and grew up in a midwestern rural setting, so I suppose I can be reckoned as one who enjoys living off the land. I fish, hunt, work with wood, and burn with wood. My wife teaches our children, cans the produce I bring in from the garden, and makes bread from flour ground here at home. We raise chickens and tend to our orchard. Our boys play with swords and shoot their bb guns and our girls play with dolls and cats. They also watch Dora while the boys read Harry Potter novels! (If this be and admission or a confession, you be the judge!)

All the saints come from various backgrounds and cultures and I suppose that all of us have certain ideals that we are committing to our children. For those who have the resources and the recognition necessary to allow to become known outside of a local setting, these ideals are naturally going to be manifested by way of writing and advertising. 

The Scriptures are not silent regarding the roles of the genders and it our duty to think seriously about how we regard our children. We are also going to have a tendency to bring up our children within the context of our own uprbringing and customs. It is unlikely I am going commit to my own children much of a global, industrial slant considering that I have never lived in a city and consequently the outworkings of such a lifestyle are rather foreign to me. If I were to have the ability to reveal and recommend my teaching and customs to the masses, it is only natural that my products are going to reflect my passions and desires. 

If a man enjoys American history and strives to commit certain historical values to their children, why are we so quick to take offense when he publicly shares these desires? If a man is convinced that women are to be the keepers at the home, why are we going to grumble when we see him teaching his daughters the domestic lessons of the home?

Everything that we do, we are to do to the glory of God. I believe that every aspect of our lives needs to be examined by the Word of God, which includes evaluating what we teach our kids and what we allow them to do, not excluding even the menial chore of considering the toys we allow into our home. 

There are always those who embrace a certain ideal and become loyal to a cause. There are those who ultimately are going to make nonessential matters more essential than they deserve. While we always groan when we observe those that seem overly zealous over incidentals, we need to reign in our easily offended egoes and consider the bottom line. Is Christ being preached? Is there a desire to train up children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord? If so, then I shall rejoice, yea, and do rejoice. If buying your daughters China dolls and your boys a wardrobe of revolutionary costumes is something you desire to do, than fill those doll houses and wardrobes to the glory of God.

We can all be prone of the sin of vainglory and pride as we consider our own habits. One may revel in the number of revolutionary custumes their boys own while another revels in how many they do not own. Some boast of the conservatism while others boast of their lawful liberality. Each pick at the other and both are guilty of the same.

I praise God for all those who love their children and strive to raise them to the glory of God. We may differ in the incidentals. Some saints don't allow thier children to read Harry Potter or watch Dora. Some don't allow the television or the computer in the home. Some make these things more essential than need be. May God bless all those who are striving to make a difference. I suppose all of us have our own goofiness that we not only tolerate, but also defend.

The saints of God would do well to be more tolerant of one another and to pray for one another. Unfortunately, we seem to delight more in tossing each other under the bus.

In Christ,


----------



## Semper Fidelis

bob said:


> The saints of God would do well to be more tolerant of one another and to pray for one another. Unfortunately, we seem to delight more in tossing each other under the bus.



Well, after all of that, I hope that if you mean to imply that my comments about this stuff is the equivalent of tossing another under the bus you would just come out and say: "...as Rich did above."

I believe the tenor of my piece was to point out that there is a tendency for some to become excessive _at the exclusion of recognizing that there can be other expressions of the same principles_. That is to say, I have no problem if you want to live off the land but I do have a problem when people see living off the land as inherently "...what this Church is about...." 

I don't agree precisely with this:


> There are always those who embrace a certain ideal and become loyal to a cause. There are those who ultimately are going to make nonessential matters more essential than they deserve. While we always groan when we observe those that seem overly zealous over incidentals, we need to reign in our easily offended egoes and consider the bottom line. Is Christ being preached? Is there a desire to train up children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.


I think the manner in which we promote nonessentials does much to obscure the essentials. The only true passion we should be promoting within the Church is Christ.

I have a lot of personal convictions that I live out quietly with my family. I do train and mentor others but I am careful not to impose personal convictions and desire that many come to the conclusions I have after they've studied. 

I believe my thoughts in this thread are complementary with my concern in the thread about children's Church. My problem is not that people with these convictions exist, it's that they tend to congregate and form Churches with people who have the same secondary convictions. It then becomes the secondary convictions that people notice first. At that point, it's not a matter of whether someone "on the outside" has a bruised ego or not.

I can get along with Americans, Filipinos, Japanese, Chinese, Arabs, Indonesians, urbanites, suburbanites, and rural folk. My problem is not making them want to be like me. I have no pride that I'm better than any of them.

I do believe that it is un-Scriptural for a Church to take on the character of a secondary issue so that it is proclaimed just as clearly (even more clearly) than the Gospel is.


----------



## kvanlaan

Rich, I think the flesh and blood mentors are essential, (and would most likely be mom and dad or a family member, for the most part) but my daughter absolutely loves reading Elsie Dinsmore books and I'm fine with that (don't worry, I know that's not what you're on about).  I think giving them these sorts of reading materials (or books like Johnny Tremaine, etc.) just help reinforce values that we're already trying to instill. But it's like you said - mentor _first_; dad's behaviour is going to instill a lot more in them than a whole raft of books on the Sons of Liberty. And heaven forbid that we make the Christian childhood all about being inserted into the Vision Forum mold. I'm sure it's easy enough to go overboard.

I just think the toys are great and would much rather have had stuff like that when I was younger instead of a Coleco video game set. The coonskin caps are a bit too "let's recapture the '50s", but for the most part I find it hard to fault the selection of stuff for sale or much of the attitude that goes with it.

BTW, I would be honored to have Rich or _any_ of the saints on this board throw me under a bus if it was needed...


----------



## Semper Fidelis

kvanlaan said:


> BTW, I would be honored to have Rich or _any_ of the saints on this board throw me under a bus if it was needed...



{sniff} {sob} I'm all pheklempt.

That's what fellowship is all about. I'd love to throw you under the bus.

Actually, you should completely understand how important it is to "...be all men to all people..." in a foreign country. I'll always cherish being in a foreign culture and having an opportunity to express Biblical principles without letting my "Americanism" get in the way.


----------



## kvanlaan

I do know what you mean - in some ways, it is impossible to keep our "Americanism" from coming up when abroad. As foreigners, we are each man an ambassador for our home country. But, it also means that we are free of the societal molds that would dictate certain behaviours and manners, were we back in our home countries. We are Christians first, and this comes in handy here in China.


----------



## Kevin

LadyFlynt said:


> Here it is:
> 
> What problem do any of you have with Doug Phillips? Curious. Also explain any parts where you are in agreement with him, please. Trying to understand due to terms such as "hyper Phillipism" and "hyper Uniting Church and Home".



His view of Baptism & Church Government.


----------



## Semper Fidelis

trevorjohnson said:


> But, as Indonesians sometimes say, "_Kalau Guru kencing berdiri, murid akan mencoba kencing berlari.." _(if the teacher pees standing the students will try to pee running) Those groups of folks who listen to the Uniting Home and Church crowds often try to pee running and outdo what Doug Phillips rights and they enter their own homeschooling "cage stage" I guess and over-emphasize these tertiary matters. Often the visionary who starts a good movement takes a background to those who read him and take his views one steps further.


 I totally LOVE that saying! I'm putting that into my all time favorite quotes library. That expresses so much truth!



> That is why I have litrally met with dozens of Uniting Home and Church people that do church in their basements.... because they are too convicted to tolerate any larger group that doesn't dot all of their I's, even when those I's are tertiary issues.



I thought you were doing to say that they don't tolerate those groups that don't dot all their I's, even though they are not capital i's.


----------



## Kevin

to What Trevor said. 

I was at a provincal Home School board meeting this weekend and we were talking about future conference speakers. In that context Doug's name came up. Now I knew Doug before he became THE Doug Phillips, and I always liked him even when we were argueing over Baptism. However the consesus was that he would be to polarising of a speaker and he would not "travel well". That is his themes are too distincly American (capital A) as opposed to christian (small c). 

BTW one of our board members told us that a Fundamental Baptist group had "taken a stand against Phillips".


----------



## LadyFlynt

Kevin said:


> His view of Baptism & Church Government.






Trevor, I believe your last few points were excellent (the outdoing).

from earlier in the thread though...the other issue is the pressures that may not be intentional but are there simply because our beliefs are not supported by certain churches, and the influence is there upon your children whether intentional or not. 

BTW, having been raised part of my childhood outside of the US, I would have to say that these churches are the ones boxed in if they feel they have to just go along with society.


----------



## calgal

SemperFideles said:


> This is a rambling polemic so I'll try to tighten this up in my conclusion:
> 
> Our goal in training our children should not be focused on the clothes they wear, the toys they play with, or whether they learn how to shoot and sew. Our focus ought to be on training men to be lovers of Christ, to be providers, to be courageous in their convictions, and to cherish women in preparation for loving a wife as Christ loves the Church. We ought to be training women to guard their hearts, to be excellent in all things, and to never allow a man to woo her that she does not respect as much as Dad or someone who won't love them as much as Dad does.
> 
> All the other stuff is nice but the "refreshingly wrong" part of it becomes dangerous because it becomes a point at which some people focus on the externals rather than the heart. Paul's guidance to men and women in the Scriptures doesn't use the words "shotgun, needles, dollies, or fishing" anywhere in the Epistles.


----------



## Redaimie

> Originally Posted by SemperFideles
> 
> All the other stuff is nice but the "refreshingly wrong" part of it becomes dangerous because it becomes a point at which some people focus on the externals rather than the heart. Paul's guidance to men and women in the Scriptures doesn't use the words "shotgun, needles, dollies, or fishing" anywhere in the Epistles.





Yep 

Though my daughter loves to bake & my husband (who likes hunting) has taught her & the boys how to shoot too.


----------



## Answerman

Draught Horse said:


> By "taking dominion" I do not mean having 20 babies, teaching them knitting and log-cutting, and passing that down to the next generation. Taking dominion is to see how the Christian faith informs and transforms my work-environment, my community, etc.



Of course, I am sure that you wouldn't rule out having 20 babies, if they are trained up in the nurture an admonition of the Lord.


----------



## Answerman

Redaimie said:


> Though my daughter loves to bake & my husband (who likes hunting) has taught her & the boys how to shoot too.



I taught my 9 year old daughter how to shoot, and after only 5 or 6 matches (of 5 shots each), she has killed 4 squirrels in 4 tries with her pellet gun. She was getting 1.25 inch clusters at 30 feet. Kinda reminds you of that marine sniper motto, "one shot one kill".


----------



## jenney

trevorjohnson said:


> But, as Indonesians sometimes say, "_Kalau Guru kencing berdiri, murid akan mencoba kencing berlari.." _



Tolong saya!  
Mati ketawa cara daripada Vision Forum.

Main main sahaja.

**as you were, folks**


----------



## RamistThomist

This thread is indicative of the Reformed "all or nothing" approach. A man has to be in total agreement "with us" or off with his head. E.g, Phillips is wrong on one issue, therefore let's go after him! If someone is stupid enough to view Phillips as a cult leader, I'm sorry; there is nothing I can do. To the normal cognitions, take it for what its worth. 

And again, with all the attacks on the faith, is he really the danger today? Another example of Reformed folk failing to fight the real enemies.


----------



## Semper Fidelis

Draught Horse said:


> This thread is indicative of the Reformed "all or nothing" approach. A man has to be in total agreement "with us" or off with his head. E.g, Phillips is wrong on one issue, therefore let's go after him! If someone is stupid enough to view Phillips as a cult leader, I'm sorry; there is nothing I can do. To the normal cognitions, take it for what its worth.
> 
> And again, with all the attacks on the faith, is he really the danger today? Another example of Reformed folk failing to fight the real enemies.



Ironically, I think this post is indicative of an "all or nothing" approach. Either he can be criticized wholly or not criticized at all. Nobody has called Phillips a cult leader except you. Physician heal thyself and learn a little nuance young man.


----------



## RamistThomist

I have seen a few derogatory remarks made against Phillips and initially took issue with that. I am trying to make critiques of Phillips without stereotyping or name calling.


----------



## RamistThomist

Look at the horrors of "trying to go back to the good ole days." Look what it does to your children:







The horror. They aren't covered with spikes, chains, or gothic face paint. I don't know. I look at ladies acting like ladies (and not implying anything to the contrary on anyone here) and think, "Without copying this, this might not be a bad idea."


----------



## MrMerlin777

All I know 'bout the guy is I like his catalog. Some of the stuff vision forum sells is pretty cool.


----------



## RamistThomist

MrMerlin777 said:


> All I know 'bout the guy is I like his catalog. Some of the stuff vision forum sells is pretty cool.



His catalogue did the following to me:

1) Rescued me from the Republican Party.
2) Introduced me to Van Til, Bahnsen, Rushdoony.
3) Introduced me to Roy Moore
4) Already a history major, it opened a new window of American history to me.


----------



## MrMerlin777

I think some of the toys they sell are cool. It's not to easy to find a slingshot anywhere these days. Alot of folks out there would be appaled at some of the stuff. They'd be saying, "You shouldn't give that kind of stuff to your son. It promotes aggression!"


----------



## RamistThomist

MrMerlin777 said:


> I think some of the toys they sell are cool. It's not to easy to find a slingshot anywhere these days. Alot of folks out there would be appaled at some of the stuff. They'd be saying, "You shouldn't give that kind of stuff to your son. It promotes aggression!"



I wanted to buy one of the crossbows to shoot at my roomate (sorry, agression). But never got around to it.


----------



## Ivan

Draught Horse said:


> His catalogue did the following to me:
> 
> 1) Rescued me from the Republican Party.
> 2) Introduced me to Van Til, Bahnsen, Rushdoony.
> 3) Introduced me to Roy Moore
> 4) Already a history major, it opened a new window of American history to me.



Well, Jacob, that is simply AWESOME!


----------



## Semper Fidelis

Draught Horse said:


> I have seen a few derogatory remarks made against Phillips and initially took issue with that. I am trying to make critiques of Phillips without stereotyping or name calling.



Except calling people "stupid" who might lack discernment. I do hope that you change your attitude about the world outside of a 1 foot radius from your person if you aspire to become an Officer in the Church some day.


----------



## RamistThomist

SemperFideles said:


> Except calling people "stupid" who might lack discernment. I do hope that you change your attitude about the world outside of a 1 foot radius from your person if you aspire to become an Officer in the Church some day.



Whatever. And I don't have any present intention of going into the ministry.


----------



## satz

Draught Horse said:


> This thread is indicative of the Reformed "all or nothing" approach. A man has to be in total agreement "with us" or off with his head. E.g, Phillips is wrong on one issue, therefore let's go after him! If someone is stupid enough to view Phillips as a cult leader, I'm sorry; there is nothing I can do. To the normal cognitions, take it for what its worth.
> 
> And again, with all the attacks on the faith, is he really the danger today? Another example of Reformed folk failing to fight the real enemies.



I think we need to remember that this conversation is happening in the context of the OP asking people to articulate where they differed with Phillips. So obviously much of the responses are 'negative'. Yes, Colleen did ask people to state where they agree, and to an extent people have done that, but I think the very nature of an internet medium such as this is people tend to type more when they have something to disagree with while simply thinking 'Amen!' in their heads when they agree.

Also, it is because Mr Phillips has so many good things to say that he is worth critiquing. If he got nothing right, or only a few things right, who would even bother with him? (Well, actually that's not entirely true, I recall a few threads right here on the PB about Rick Warren that were pretty voluminous) However, it is because he is good on many things I that I think it is worth pointing out where he goes wrong.

Finally, I think it is unfortunate that some of his errors (ie going too far on bible gender roles in society) are actually promoted as a significant aspect of his ministry. So when people take issue with him, it is not that he has a great ministry and people have gone searching though his trash for some minor views he holds and are using those against him. Rather, people take issue with some of his views because he is actively teaching them as a large part of the Vision Forum agenda (and I don't use that word in any negative sense).


----------



## calgal

Jacob:

Do you not think people can dress their kids modestly by themselves? Quite honestly teaching boys and girls how to dress and act can be done without emulating a scary combination of Hasidic and FLDS "style." In other words, mom and dad being united in deciding what is and is NOT appropriate and choosing styles that are age appropriate and not too revealing. There is a way to dress ones girls modestly even from Target and Macy's: it takes longer and means Mom has to be consistent. Again there are plenty of nice church families who manage to dress their girls like unto young LADIES. As for the Goth kids: please tell me your session would not turn them away.  Those kids do calm down and some may even belong to your Elders. Hopefully when you grow up some you can understand that.

Giving into fear is not a Godly reason to run and hide from the modern world (with the exception of the internets).


----------



## Coram Deo

Instead of wasting time looking for modest clothing in target or macy's which can take hours if not more, why not make modest, simple, plain clothing for our daugthers.

As for the Goth youth, no they should not be turned away but aleast admonished.. As for the Elders children, elders are suppose to have their children in submission not in rebellion which is what Goth is ALL about.. Rebellion. If an Elder child is one and the Elder does not correct this then the Elder needs and is required to step down until he has his house back in rule or the Teenager is outside of his house due to his rebellion.

Michael



calgal said:


> Jacob:
> 
> Do you not think people can dress their kids modestly by themselves? Quite honestly teaching boys and girls how to dress and act can be done without emulating a scary combination of Hasidic and FLDS "style." In other words, mom and dad being united in deciding what is and is NOT appropriate and choosing styles that are age appropriate and not too revealing. There is a way to dress ones girls modestly even from Target and Macy's: it takes longer and means Mom has to be consistent. Again there are plenty of nice church families who manage to dress their girls like unto young LADIES. As for the Goth kids: please tell me your session would not turn them away.  Those kids do calm down and some may even belong to your Elders. Hopefully when you grow up some you can understand that.
> 
> Giving into fear is not a Godly reason to run and hide from the modern world (with the exception of the internets).


----------



## kvanlaan

Hang on a sec. I don't think that Jacob is out to machine-gun every non-theonomist/Vision Forum dissenter in the world. 

What I think his fear is (and how far off the mark is it?), is that the influences of the world in general are not healthy for our kids. Vision forum products don't present any real problem in my eyes, the only danger is falling into "Doug Philips is a demi-god, and Vision Forum is his prophet." The 'stuff' itself is fine, there's nothing wrong with it, and I for one would much rather my boys be playing 'colonial soldier' (albeit in a uniform sewed by their mom and sisters, no need to pay the big bucks) than about 90% of the trash available on the market today.

Also, it is not about turning away 'Goth kids' but I think it IS about mom and dad's responsibility to not let it get to that point. The nihilism/fatalism/perpetual sorrow that goes along with that lifestyle has no place in the Christian family (and there's a  for Christian liberty, but Goth is a movement without and in complete rebellion to God and I don't think that comment is unreasonable.) Sure, maybe they will turn themselves around and become elders one day, but too often they just don't. Growing up in the CRC, I saw plenty of kids that were allowed to "sow their wild oats" and they simply never came back from the sowing. Why let it go that far? Why not bring up your children in His ways and His ways alone? (And no, this is not saying that "Vision Forum" is 'His way'...)


----------



## Redaimie

calgal said:


> Jacob:
> 
> There is a way to dress ones girls modestly even from Target and Macy's: it takes longer and means Mom has to be consistent. .



 

One thing I do is sew lace on the sleaves of plain shirts that my daughter can wear under a sun dress or I alter a dress to make it modest. You can get great buys at Target & you don't have to spend much to turn it into a modest dress.


----------



## calgal

Kevin to a point I agree with Jacob but he is young and thinking in black and white (that being said I am feeling ancient ). I think like anything else this is a tool that some families can use to help them but this can also be a stumbling block. Not every family will have the same dynamic and there will be single moms, single dads, blended families, biracial couples and all sorts of variables in any given congregation. I used Goth since the term is misapplied to kids who wear black and dye their hair/have mohawks. If they are showing up on the Lord's Day, sitting reverently in church and other than looking funny are nice kids, why turn them over to the sewer that is Mars Hill or Res Life (Google GR for these two abominations: they almost make the pastorettes at Eastern Ave CRC palatable). I do pray we do show love when correcting these kids as well.


----------



## calgal

Redaimie said:


> One thing I do is sew lace on the sleaves of plain shirts that my daughter can wear under a sun dress or I alter a dress to make it modest. You can get great buys at Target & you don't have to spend much to turn it into a modest dress.



 And selective thrift store/rummage sale finds are useful.


----------



## Coram Deo

Mars Hill with Mark Driscoll is an abomination.... You are so right on target with that comment....

Question? What is Easter Ave CRC and what are their problems?

Michael



calgal said:


> Kevin to a point I agree with Jacob but he is young and thinking in black and white (that being said I am feeling ancient ). I think like anything else this is a tool that some families can use to help them but this can also be a stumbling block. Not every family will have the same dynamic and there will be single moms, single dads, blended families, biracial couples and all sorts of variables in any given congregation. I used Goth since the term is misapplied to kids who wear black and dye their hair/have mohawks. If they are showing up on the Lord's Day, sitting reverently in church and other than looking funny are nice kids, why turn them over to the sewer that is Mars Hill or Res Life (Google GR for these two abominations: they almost make the pastorettes at Eastern Ave CRC palatable). I do pray we do show love when correcting these kids as well.


----------



## Semper Fidelis

kvanlaan said:


> Hang on a sec. I don't think that Jacob is out to machine-gun every non-theonomist/Vision Forum dissenter in the world.
> 
> What I think his fear is (and how far off the mark is it?), is that the influences of the world in general are not healthy for our kids. Vision forum products don't present any real problem in my eyes, the only danger is falling into "Doug Philips is a demi-god, and Vision Forum is his prophet." The 'stuff' itself is fine, there's nothing wrong with it, and I for one would much rather my boys be playing 'colonial soldier' (albeit in a uniform sewed by their mom and sisters, no need to pay the big bucks) than about 90% of the trash available on the market today.
> 
> Also, it is not about turning away 'Goth kids' but I think it IS about mom and dad's responsibility to not let it get to that point. The nihilism/fatalism/perpetual sorrow that goes along with that lifestyle has no place in the Christian family (and there's a  for Christian liberty, but Goth is a movement without and in complete rebellion to God and I don't think that comment is unreasonable.) Sure, maybe they will turn themselves around and become elders one day, but too often they just don't. Growing up in the CRC, I saw plenty of kids that were allowed to "sow their wild oats" and they simply never came back from the sowing. Why let it go that far? Why not bring up your children in His ways and His ways alone? (And no, this is not saying that "Vision Forum" is 'His way'...)



I completely agree. If this would simply be acknowledged and not pretend like concerns are unwarranted or that we need not care about the fact that ideas are taken to excess then I have no problem with it.

I'm not against girls playing with girlie things or wearing lace and what not. When one becomes a teacher and writes books and gets a following, though, one has to bear some responsibility to temper comments so that divisive behavior is not reinforced.

As I said before, I can still read Doug Wilson with profit. I'm not a fan of throwing babies out with bathwater but I also want to point out pitfalls. 

Just a couple of months ago I had a couple move to the island that found out I was here on the island from the PB. We met up a few times and they were the stereotypical category 3 Reformed couple I talked about. They were brand new to the Reformed faith and had only read books on theonomy. They had both been flaming Arminians not a couple of years ago and were now tacked hard the other way.

I asked them what Church they were attending. They weren't. Why? Because there wasn't a Church out here that was good enough for their new found convictions. I rebuked the young man and told him that he needs to be in a Church. I also told him I would not mentor him (as he desired) until he started attending Church regularly. I refuse to indulge a man's appetite for theology in general when they refuse to worship in a Church with other Christians who aren't worthy of their standards.

Now is this Doug Philips fault? No, not fully, and only an imbalanced reading of what I'm concerned about would conclude that. He can't be held directly accountable for every immature expression of teaching. In another sense, though, it is the fault of a leader if his followers are moving in a direction unexpected and no corrective action is taken to ameliorate the trend. Military commanders understand this very well - that they're responsible for the messages they both explicitly and implicitly communicate. If a follower takes a directive in a direction you didn't intend then it's time to do some work to tighten up the message a bit.

From my vantage point, simply saying that a man has no responsibility for the actions of his followers is simply unacceptable. 

Not all should be teachers.... Better to receive criticism and look at the fruit than judgment for what your teaching produced in others.


----------



## Augusta

thunaer said:


> Mars Hill with Mark Driscoll is an abomination.... You are so right on target with that comment....
> 
> Question? What is Easter Ave CRC and what are their problems?
> 
> Michael



Don't be so quick to judge Mark Driscoll. The White Horse Inn interviewed him. He has separated with the Emergent Church movement and was sounding quite orthodox to me. Sure he needs to turn paedo




and learn about the RPW and stuff but his theology seemed pretty sound otherwise. He is at least getting the gospel right over there. We all start somewhere.


----------



## calgal

thunaer said:


> Mars Hill with Mark Driscoll is an abomination.... You are so right on target with that comment....
> 
> Question? What is Easter Ave CRC and what are their problems?
> 
> Michael



Two words: Woman Pastors. Also known as pastorettes. So Mars Hill is a franchise like McDonalds or Calvary Chapel?  Cute.


----------



## jenney

Augusta said:


> Don't be so quick to judge Mark Driscoll. The White Horse Inn interviewed him. He has separated with the Emergent Church movement and was sounding quite orthodox to me.



He's bewildering to me because he does seem to comprehend the basics of the gospel and has some good things to say about our needing to be authentic with one another, to believe the Bible rather what we want it to say, to live our faith and not just talk about it. He does have some valuable things to offer.

His coarse jesting and crass speech, however, are not fitting to an elder in the church. It indicates an immaturity of spirit that, in my opinion, disqualifies him from office.

Any man who uses, from the pulpit, phrases like Moderation: quote from Driscoll's book that Bob Vigneault edited out is a man who needs to discipline his tongue and attitude. I don't think it is worth sifting the wheat from the chaff. I can get the same "good stuff" just reading my Bible and applying it, so I'd rather just skip Driscoll and spend more time with more edifying people.

Doug Phillips might be one of those people, but I don't think we can lump the two men into the same category. One must always discern and separate wheat from chaff. I'm suspecting Phillips has a considerably smaller amount of chaff than Driscoll.


----------



## BobVigneault

Jenny, I really do appreciate you sharing that quote by Mr. Driscoll. I was thinking of buying that book. I researched the quote and saw other quotes that were equally repulsive. Won't be buying the book. I think I recommended it to Kevin Van Der Laan as well. DON'T DO IT KEVIN!

I decided to edit it out because this is the family forum and well, you're right, that is rude stuff. Ugh! Sorry but thanks for helping me save some money.


----------



## jenney

*i hate to say it Bob,*

but I picked one of the milder quotes.

I don't mind being moderated! I included that because quite often people don't believe how foul-mouthed he really is, but sadly, there is much more in his books. And you are right, I don't want my own children reading my own post!

If anyone feels a need for the actual quotes, you can p.m. me.


----------



## BobVigneault

Here's a link to a fellow's blog who reviewed Driscoll's book. The long article contains the quotes that Jenny was referring to. Thank you again Jenny. Check it out if you really need to see whether or not these reflect on the man's character. I would encourage you to examine yourself and make sure you aren't checking it out for prurient reasons. It's a fine line.


----------



## MrMerlin777

BobVigneault said:


> Here's a link to a fellow's blog who reviewed Driscoll's book. The long article contains the quotes that Jenny was referring to. Thank you again Jenny. Check it out if you really need to see whether or not these reflect on the man's character. I would encourage you to examine yourself and make sure you aren't checking it out for prurient reasons. It's a fine line.



Read the link.
Whoa! Mr Driscoll does indeed seem to be a loose cannon.


----------



## kvanlaan

> Jenny, I really do appreciate you sharing that quote by Mr. Driscoll. I was thinking of buying that book. I researched the quote and saw other quotes that were equally repulsive. Won't be buying the book. I think I recommended it to Kevin Van Der Laan as well. DON'T DO IT KEVIN!



Too late, too late. I bought the book, I've read it, and now I'm lost, swirling my way down the toilet bowl of apostacy.

I blame you, Bob. 

I'll see you on the left side of the throne with all the other goats...





Just kidding. I didn't get it. Some of the quotes brought out in the review were just jaw-dropping. On top of some obvious theological issues, the guy just sounds like a real jerk.


----------



## BobVigneault

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was looking for a good book on the church and you recommended a bad one.' Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we recommend a bad book to you?’ Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not recommend a good book to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but those who recommended good books into eternal life.”

Whew! That was a close one Kevin.


----------



## kvanlaan

You know, I think that anyone who read the review on challies.com would think twice before buying it. And not because of the opinions expressed by the reviewer, but because of the quotes directly from the text. 

If he was my pastor and I had read the book, I'd have a hard time talking to him about any sort of problem/situation in my life for fear that it wouldn't qualify as a serious enough issue, and I'd be bawled out for it. (And told to quit being such a cry baby and get over it.)


----------



## turmeric

Just don't call him at 3 a.m. whatever you do!


----------



## MrMerlin777

turmeric said:


> Just don't call him at 3 a.m. whatever you do!



You got that right. I wouldn't dare. 'course if he went off on me like that at anytime 3am or 6pm it wouldn't matter to me really, I'd probably be "losin' some of my religion" and telling him off.


----------

