Doug Wilson: Fashionable Calvinista Has Disturbing Views on Slavery

Whenever I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally. Abraham Lincoln

wikicommons
Scars of whipped slave, Baton Rouge 1863-Wikicommons

 

[We want to welcome all the visitors from patheos.com]

I take on this subject with some trepidation. After reading the account of a professor at the University of Idaho who criticized Wilson, I realized that some Christians really like to use the words “slanderous” and “defamatory” when their ideas are challenged. So, to prevent said tactics being aimed at your glamorous and legally shy blog queen, I shall limit myself to what has been written in a few sources.

So our readers can understand the far-reaching effects of Wilson’s brilliance, I end the post with a video in which Piper extolls the virtues of Doug Wilson. As you read the following post, never, ever forget the Piper says, loud and clear,  “Doug gets the Gospel right.” Also, just to show his continued popularity with the Calvinistas, John Piper invited him to the Pastors Conference earlier this year (You know, the one in which Christianity has a masculine feel) and the Gospel Coalition, just this month, featured several articles that he wrote link.

In order to give our readers a quick synopsis of the issue, I start with a review from Wikipedia. I know that you can’t trust Wikipedia. However, as you will see in the other sources, this synopsis provides an accurate overview.

The Synopisis
From Wikipedia  on Doug Wilson link

“Wilson's most controversial work is probably his pamphlet Southern Slavery, As It Was, which he wrote along with League of the South co-founder and fellow Christian minister Steve Wilkins. The pamphlet stated that "slavery produced in the South a genuine affection between the races that we believe we can say has never existed in any nation before the War or since." Historians such as Peter H. Wood, Clayborne Carson, and Bancroft Prize winner Ira Berlin condemned the pamphlet's arguments, with Wood calling them as spurious as holocaust denial.

Wilson held a February 2004 conference for those who supported his ideas, such as pastor George Grant, in the University of Idaho. The University published a disclaimer distancing itself from the event, and numerous anti-conference protests took place. Wilson described critical attacks as 'abolitionist propaganda'. He also has repeatedly denied any racist leanings. Wilson has described his own views as 'paleo-Confederate'. He has said his "long war" is not on behalf of white supremacy; rather, Wilson seeks to revive the memory—however rose-tinted—of eras in Western history when faith and reason seemed at one, when family, church, and the organic "community of Christians" that T. S. Eliot describes in Christianity and Culture were more powerful than the state.

Canon Press ceased publication of Southern Slavery, As It Was when it became aware of serious citation errors in several passages authored by Wilkins.Robert McKenzie, the history professor who first noticed the citation problems, described the authors as being "sloppy" rather than "malevolent.".

Black and Tan

Wilson decided to redo his work and republished it as Black and Tan. For some reason, he did so without Steve Wilkins  link.

What happened in Moscow, Idaho

Now we move on up to Moscow, Idaho, which appears to be the base for Wilson’s empire. It is of interest to note that the Aryan Nation, a white supremacist group appears to have quite a few ties  to this area of Idaho. Once again I link to Wikipedia which has done a good job in consolidating a number of reports of the activities of the Aryan Nationin this part of the country. Of course, Doug Wilson does not appear to have any ties to such groups. My guess is, however, that such groups would not be opposed to some of his views on the “niceties” of racial relations in antebellum slavery link.

Two professors from the University of Idaho decided to provide a counterpoint to Wilson’s viewpoint on slavery. To say fire and brimstone rained down upon them is not too much of an exaggeration. One of the professors, William Ramsey wrote the following article:  The Late Unpleasantness in Idaho: Southern Slavery and the Culture Wars link on 12/19/04. The following quotes are from this article.

“Such questions brought the small college town of Moscow, Idaho, home of the University of Idaho, to the brink of open hostility during the past year. Previously friendly neighbors perfected outrageously inventive insults for one another and in some cases cut off communication altogether.”

In response to Wilson and Wilkin’s Southern Slavery: As It Was,  Ramsey and Sean Quinlan wrote, Southern Slavery As It Wasn’t: Professional Historians Respond to Neo-Confederate Misinformation.

Wison believes that patriarchy and southern slavery are sanctioned by the Bible.

They said that Wilson/Wilkins argued that “southern slavery was not only sanctioned by the Bible but, thanks to the patriarchal kindness of their wise evangelical masters, a positive, happy, and pleasant experience for the majority of southern blacks.”

Wilson believes that slaves really appreciated slavery.

They also believe that Wilson/Wilkins pushed the idea that “southern slaves genuinely appreciated those benefits and supported the system that provided them.”

Slavery resulted in mutual intimacy(!) and if one does not agee, it is due to civil rights propaganda.

Ramsey pointed out this quote from the Wilson book. “There has never been,” they argue, “a multi-racial society that has existed with such mutual intimacy and harmony in the history of the world.” (p. 24). (Might I point out  that there appeared to be many instances of intimacy that might have been frowned upon by the 10 commandments-Thomas Jefferson/Sally Hemmings case in point))

More disturbing analysis by Ramsey/Quinlan appears to indicate that Wilson/Wilkins  “deride the consensus view of slavery that has emerged over the last fifty years of academic scholarship as “abolitionist propaganda” and “civil rights propaganda.”

Our problems today are a result of the South losing?

Interestingly, Ramsey/Quinlan point out the Wilson/Wilkins beleive that many of today’s problems in the United States found their roots in the  “theological heresies implicit in the abolitionist movement and its unfortunate victory over the South in the Civil War.”

Ramsey and Quinlan are shocked at Wilson’s response.

Ramsey found it absurd that he would have to write a paper to state that the evidence does not show that slaves found their lot in life “pleasant.” He thought it was a done deal. So, the ensuing firestorm took the two professors by surprise.

“We failed to anticipate the depth of their commitment to pro-slavery ideology and the sophistication of their attacks. We underestimated the extent of their support base in northern Idaho and the ability of organizations such as the League of the South to refocus their efforts on Moscow and to mobilize activists.”

“The controversy made it clear that Douglas Wilson was more than just a local troublemaker and southern partisan. He had established two “Reformed” evangelical churches in town whose congregations, thanks to nationwide recruitment efforts, now represented 10 percent of Moscow’s entire population. He had founded a k-12 school called “Logos” that taught history from a “Biblical Worldview” and an unaccredited college called “New Saint Andrews,” where he had installed himself as “Senior Fellow of Theology.”

I found it amusing that Wilson claimed that the book review was “slanderous” and “defamatory,” two words that are consistently used by certain NeoCalvinists when people, especially bloggers, attempt to disagree with their winsome trajectory.

Wilson apparently demanded both a public apology and disciplinary action on the part of the University. When that action did not occur” Wilson wrote to Idaho Governor asking him to step in and “remove the University of Idaho as a launching pad for their mortar rounds.” (Dee's small group members are standing by to receive protest phone calls.)

Wilson’s lovely 2004 gathering of like-minded “theologians and historians,” one of whom apparently believes in exterminating homosexuals.

Ramsey discusses a major event in which Wilson had “scheduled himself as the keynote speaker, praising the southern racist ideologue R.L. Dabney, but he had also scheduled as co-speakers white supremacist League of the South co-founder Steve Wilkins and the anti-gay Tennessee minister George Grant, notorious for advocating the extermination of all homosexuals in his book Legislating Immorality.”

Christianity Today’s Molly Worthen wrote an article on Wilson called The Controversialist link in 2009. She adds more information. The following quotes are from that article.

Wilson claims to be a “paleo-Confederate.”

“Although he believes that "the South was right on all the essential constitutional and cultural issues surrounding the war," Wilson has repeatedly declared that he is no neo-Confederate. He prefers the label paleo-Confederate.

"You're not going to scare me away from the word Confederate like you just said 'Boo!' " Wilson says. "I would define a neo-Confederate as someone who thinks we are still fighting that war. Instead, I would say we're fighting in a long war, and that [the Civil War] was one battle that we lost."

"Wilson says his "long war" is not on behalf of white supremacy, though his criticisms of government-enforced desegregation echo those of neo-secessionist groups like the League of the South.”

Wilson wishes to save civiliization.

“Rather, Wilson seeks to revive the memory—however rose-tinted—of eras in Western history when faith and reason seemed at one, when family, church, and the organic "community of Christians" that T. S. Eliot describes in Christianity and Culture were more powerful than the state. When Wilson says that the mission of NSA is to "save civilization," this is his meaning.”

Wilson favors execution for adultery?

“But when I asked what he thought of the death penalty for homosexual acts suggested in Leviticus 20:13, he did not shy away from the theonomic hard line that disturbs many Christians. "You can't apply Scripture woodenly," he says. "You might exile some homosexuals, depending on the circumstances and the age of the victim. There are circumstances where I'd be in favor of execution for adultery. … I'm not proposing legislation. All I'm doing is refusing to apologize for certain parts of the Bible."

Wilson apparently believes if we give on slavery, we go down the slippery slope.

“Wilson and Wilkins argued that if Christians admit that the Bible's treatment of slavery may be outdated, it's only a short way down the slippery slope of relativism toward relinquishing the Bible's teaching on homosexuality and other hot issues.”

Protests against Wilson

“The pamphlet, and a conference that Wilson hosted in summer 2004, mentioned above( most probably along with Wilson’s actions against the professors-ed note) provoked a storm of protest from local university students and residents. Scholars challenged its claims that slavery in the South "was a relationship based upon mutual affection and confidence," and revealed that the booklet had been partially plagiarized. The Southern Poverty Law Center, an Alabama nonprofit, called it a "repulsive apologia for slavery."

In conclusion, this blogger is perplexed. One would think that wise theology gurus would distance themselves from Wilson. But, in fact, Wilson is becoming more mainstream. I leave you with one video by John Piper who appears thrilled to have Wilson speaking at a conference of Desiring God. Perhaps this will help our readers to see that there is a possibility that these deeply troubling views of Wilson are gaining purchase in the Neo Calvinist circles. Why else is he being invited to all those conferences. ( Note: This video was shot by Desiring God and is not a parody with the shaking, as far as I know.)

My parting shot? To repeat the header quote, " Whenever I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally." Abraham Lincoln.


Lydia's Corner: Haggai 1:1-2:23 Revelation 11:1-19 Psalm 139:1-24 Proverbs 30:15-16

Comments

Doug Wilson: Fashionable Calvinista Has Disturbing Views on Slavery — 326 Comments

  1. This is astonishing and horrible. What is most troubling is that many home schoolers who would NEVER agree with this crazy spin on slavery and the Civil War will buy materials from these people, go to home school workshops with them, etc. ad nauseum…I think usually they don’t go deep enough into the philosophy to find the disturbing undercurrents, or simply just don’t pay attention…This is one big reason why we have been distancing ourselves more and more from the so called “Christian Homeschool Movement”, preferring to be called simply homeschooling parents who are Christian.

  2. Once again, another self-serving “pastor” who is NOT a Christian and needs to step away from the pulpit.

  3. “Wilson and Wilkins argued that if Christians admit that the Bible’s treatment of slavery may be outdated, it’s only a short way down the slippery slope of relativism toward relinquishing the Bible’s teaching on homosexuality and other hot issues.”

    Actually, the “Why are we still talking about this?” slope that started with the Catholic Church’s attempt to re-litigate Connecticut v. Griswold is so slick that we’ve jumped clean over repealing the 19th Amendment and landed squarely on re-fighting the Civil War. I guess when you think about it, Wilson’s views are the hyper-authoritarianism of the Calvinistas taken to its logical conclusion, so in a way, it makes a twisted sort of sense.

  4. Chris

    Twisted is correct. Christopher Hitchen’s liked Wilson because he claimed that Wilson was consistent and logical. So, besides Piper, he was endorsed by a now dead atheist. 

  5. FYI, the bookstore at the SGM church where we were members for many years carried a lot of books by Doug Wilson, as well as John Piper, Mark Driscoll, Voddie Baucham, and of course CJ Mahaney.

  6. Face it, most of our apostasy from our Christian founding as a nation is caused by …….

    [[Mod Delete some satirical language]]
    Another moderator(Dee) adding clarity-I know Muff and where he stands on this issue. He is a great proponent of toleration and love of other people, more so than many. I love and respect Muff.

    Muff is trying to convey how many so called Christians in the South viewed the interference of what they considered liberal Jewish people from the north who involved themselves, often heroically, in the race relations in the South during the 1960s. I believe he was trying to use language that was used by sweet SBC people who sat in SBC churches and encouraged racial segregation. There were some Jewish people who actually lost their lives marching in the South. They were ridiculed by racists of all sorts.

    Muff was merely reminding us of this sad history.And nice SBC people used such language back in the 1960s.So, with that in mind, reconsider his comment. Christians in the South had much to be ashamed of.

  7. Slightly OT, but there is another story about Christ Church and Wilson that you need to take a look at. http://federal-vision.blogspot.com/2008/03/serial-pdophile.html is a good starting point.

    Also, he most certainly does not “get the Gospel right”, unless by “Gospel” you mean “medieval Roman Catholic theology”. Piper’s endorsement – which came in the middle of a multi-denomination battle over Wilson’s “Federal Vision” theology – was outrageous, and it demonstrated an enormous hubris on Piper’s part, that he apparently believed he could or should settle the issue with his personal adjudication.

    Of course, if you factor in Piper’s connection to Daniel Fuller, whose doctrine was a kind of proto-FV, then it becomes clear that Piper is incapable of hostility to FV, as it would also require him to repudiate a man whom he regards as his theological mentor.

  8. Never Again

    Knowing Muff, I believe he is saying that some Christians blame the Jewish people and liberals for screwing up the history. He is probably speculating on Wilson’s denial of civil rights propaganda. Jewish people played an admirable role in the civil rights movement, often putting themselves at risk when they travelled to the South to march. 

  9. Without going too much into Wilson’s ideas, this is not a good idea for them to surface, given the international problems with people trafficking, poor treatment of domestics in countries such as Saudi Arabia, and the recent conviction of a family in the UK who had effectively enslaved vulnerable adults and were working them under harsh conditions for virtually nothing.

    It also seems symptomatic of a certain state of mind to hark back to a lost period in history, whether it’s the antebellum South or the era when Stalin ruled the USSR and “at least the trains ran on time”. Such yearnings for the past seem to occur in times of great anxiety, crisis or uncertainty.

  10. Here is the citation for the peer-reviewed article by Quinlan and Ramsey, in which they explain why the Douglas Wilson book is inaccurate.
    Oklahoma City University Law Review, Volume 30, pages 209-223, 2005.

    I obtained the book Slavery the Way it Wasn’t through my university library and I can attest that the quote about racial harmony is accurate. I also looked up Wilson’s comment to the Moscow-Pullman Daily News, Oct. 11–12, 2003. Hard as it is to believe, he really said that homosexuals should be executed or exiled.

  11. I learned of Wilson and other theonomist over at oldlife.com. They are INSANE. You should read how they argue over at oldlife. My goodness I can’t believe these people have any popularity. Keep sounding the alarm!

  12. 2003 was the start of some not so great years for Wilson it would seem…Southern Slavery scandal…2 pedophiles loose in his church and school…imprecatory praying against his community. And-since Piper says he’s (Wilson) got the gospel right, we must examine the fruit of his life-his moral character and his loving others.

    Regarding That Bad Dog’s link in his comment at 6:30- be sure to read the comments at the end of the article.

    Some very sad commentary from those who have been involved with Wilson. Three part series.

    http://federal-vision.blogspot.com/2008/06/end-of-trinity-fest-first-blast-part-1.html

    http://federal-vision.blogspot.com/2008/07/end-of-trinity-fest-part-2-we-are.html

    http://federal-vision.blogspot.com/2008/07/end-of-trinity-fest-part-3-calling.html

  13. Laura said: This is one big reason why we have been distancing ourselves more and more from the so called “Christian Homeschool Movement”, preferring to be called simply homeschooling parents who are Christian.

    YOU AND ME BOTH…

    I am tired of having to explain myself as a “normal” homeschooler!

    Dee/Deb – I can hardly comment on this thread because it makes my blood boil more than the other topics we cover. It is just a hard thing to discuss living where I live…

  14. “abolitionist propaganda”

    I thought that was a GOOD thing.

    “Wilson decided to redo his work and republished it as Black and Tan.”

    Oh, the irony of that title. *snort*

    “Ramsey pointed out this quote from the Wilson book. “There has never been,” they argue, “a multi-racial society that has existed with such mutual intimacy and harmony in the history of the world.” (p. 24).”

    Oh, yes. My ancestors certainly relished the intimacy of rape and torture at the hands of their harmonious white benefactors.

    “We failed to anticipate the depth of their commitment to pro-slavery ideology and the sophistication of their attacks. We underestimated the extent of their support base in northern Idaho and the ability of organizations such as the League of the South to refocus their efforts on Moscow and to mobilize activists.”

    Ok, northern Idaho is now off my bucket list.

  15. “Hard as it is to believe, he really said that homosexuals should be executed or exiled.”

    Evidently he believes pedophiles who molest very small children should be put to death as well. (Well, except for Sitler, former student at NSA who was the fortunate recepient of a letter to the judge from Wilson instead-asking for leniency and lauding Sitler’s eager repentance and “complete honesty” that Wilson just somehow infallibly knew. But we should just never mind about that…and also never mind about the fact that it was after Sitler was sentenced that they found the rather large collection of photos of children on a website of Sitler’s…which he did not reveal to the police upon his arrest.)

    http://federal-vision.blogspot.com/2008/08/leading-charge.html

    In the letter, Wilson seemed to think Sitler’s pedophile acts are a result of “discontentment”.

    http://www.tomandrodna.com/CR_2005_02027/CC_Ltr_081905_Page_1.jpg
    http://www.tomandrodna.com/CR_2005_02027/CC_Ltr_081905_Page_2.jpg

  16. Never again

    Please look at the original comment again. We tried to clarify it. Muff is a wonderful man who is the epitome of respect and love for people of all stripes, more so than most. I vouch for him. I know what he was doing and he meant well. he was pointing fingers at the “sweet Baptists” who were venomous in the racial segregation in the 1960s.

  17. Kolya

    Wilson denies racism. Looking at his statements, I have my doubts. It is that mindset that continues to allow for human trafficking which is flourishing in ways unimaginable even 50 years ago. 

  18. Lindsay

    i am furious after writing this. but the Calvinistas who play around with Wilson must be called out. Have they ever confronted him? Piper seems to like him a whole bunch yet he write against racism. There seems to be a bit of forked tongue here.

  19. Diane

    It seems I have more to write on Doug Wilson. Where oh where are the Gospel Coalition boys who care so much about racial reconciliation.

  20. “Oh, yes. My ancestors certainly relished the intimacy of rape and torture at the hands of their harmonious white benefactors.”

    Wilson views rape as the judgement of God on a people (Fidelity: What It Means To Be A One-Woman Man pg 82)–how then can he say, “There has never been,” they argue, “a multi-racial society that has existed with such mutual intimacy and harmony in the history of the world.”

  21. Dee wrote-

    “Diane

    It seems I have more to write on Doug Wilson. Where oh where are the Gospel Coalition boys who care so much about racial reconciliation.”

    Well, at least one of them is quoting Wilson in other disgusting ways.

    http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/gospeldrivenchurch/2012/07/13/the-polluted-waters-of-50-shades-of-grey-etc/

    (I was not going to post this since I have taken over your blog lol and also this is so disgusting to read. I guess this Jared Wilson is a fan.)

  22. Thanks for clarifying the intent of the statement.

    Also, unrelated, but any news on the court hearing today?

  23. “So our readers can understand the far-reaching effects of Wilson’s brilliance, I end the post with a video in which Piper extolls the virtues of Doug Wilson.”

    You know, Piper is proving to have very little discernment. Not too long ago he removed his “I Looooove Mark Driscoll’s theology” video promo off the net.

    Rick Warren
    Mark Driscoll
    Doug Wilson

    Who is next? Ted Haggard?

  24. Do you all realize Wilson was considered on the fringe of Christianity just a few years back? I used to read his “blog and mablog” back then because I was studying the REformed movement and some of the fringe groups. I came across a blog called pooh’sthink about Wilson’s “kirk” in Idaho. This young man had moved there to be a part of it- was disillusioned and was trying to get away with his family and he took Wilson on with a blog which evidently at the tiem was a huge deal to stand up to Wilson. His name was Michael Metzler or something like that. I can remember reading about life in the “kird” in the Wilson cult and being totally flabbergasted. It was a cross between Stepford Wives and 1984

    All this to say, he is being mainstreamed. Like many of the fringe are. So what does that mean? I think we should all pay very close attention. What else will become acceptable? It is pretty bad when you feel safer with the heathens than these guys.

  25. Never Again

    Yes, Julie Anne said the judge will review the documents and will notify them of his decisions soon. So, she keeps waiting….

  26. Diane -

    Was Jared Wilson actually agreeing with what Doug Wilson had written? I’m flabbergasted! I guess Doug explained that all to his daughters as he gave them in marriage to their new conquerors? Sickening!

  27. Diane

    You comment all you want. i learn so much from you. I am currently waiting for the latest emmisary from the GC/T4G to show up and tell us why we are all terrible mistaken in our assessments.

  28. I’ll read what everyone else has said in a minute, but I think this demands immediate comment.
    This guy is an absolutely hateful racist misogynistic crackpot. No ifs, no buts, he should be soundly condemned by anyone who has more than two brain cells.
    Despite his clear assumption that he thinks everything should be ordered (what he thinks of as) “biblically”, I’m willing to bet he wears clothes woven of two kinds of material, despite the fact that Leviticus 19:19 explicitly forbids it.

  29. “But I get the vibe that the more authorterian the organziation the mor elikely child abuse will happen there. Is that incorrect to say? – Eagle

    I think you are exactly right.

  30. Sergius

    Metzler must be really, really important. Bayly only commented on our blog. He got a call. I would looooooove to get a call from him. TWW will have arrived. I need to read this Metzler. I could learn from him.

     

  31. @Dee

    He’s working on a Ph.D. and doesn’t blog much anymore — at least not last time I checked. It was actually through Metzler that I found that all-time-favorite Bully Brothers’ thread that I quoted to you and Deb back in May (and which someone later post a link to on TWW). Another interesting thing on his blog was that some of the women who were banned from the BB blog actually wrote to Metzler and gave their “testimonies.”

  32. I love how Piper says that everyone around Wilson is dumb.
    I also love how Mark Driscoll and that other dweeb fist bump behind Piper as though what Piper said was so dang clever they wish they had said it.

    Okay, no I don’t love it. These men are puffed-up and insufferable.

  33. Isn’t it funny how all the macho man theologians lack the balls to call out a racist? And I thought masculine Christianity was all about being tough and saying the hard things and not worrying that you might upset someone or rock the boat. I guess my silly ladybrain was wrong.

  34. Eagle

    On Idaho’s behalf, I will say that the best poatao I ever ate was in the great state. We were driving through and we stopped at a restaurant next to a farm and they served a just dug up baked potato. It was wonderful. Alas, I am on a low carb diet, trying to shed my remaining 10 pounds. I would kill for that potato.

  35. @ Briget

    “Diane -

    Was Jared Wilson actually agreeing with what Doug Wilson had written?”

    I assumed so since he did not say anything negative about it in his opening paragraph.

    He said he found it “relevant” and makes this statement, “It is found in the chapter in the book on Rape, and Wilson argues that this sort of sexual pathology is a perverted version of good, God-honoring, and body-protecting authority and submission between husbands and wives.

    It sounds to me like he does not disagree with Wilson’s quote.

  36. Pam

    There are women who visit this blog who have more brains and guts than half of the boys who pretend they are patriarchs.

  37. Wilson is a white supremacist – no ifs, ands, or buts.

    He needs to be denounced for this, not feted.

    Interesting search results over at the Southern Poverty Law Center’s site:

    http://www.splcenter.org/search/apachesolr_search/doug%20wilson

    I’m surprised that they don’t have an article on Wilson in their “profiles” section.

    And (ironically or not), I’m currently reading Lift Up Thy Voice: The Grimké Family’s journey from Slaveholders to Civil Rights Leaders. I wonder if Wilson has ever read either of the Grimké sisters’ essays debunking slavery from a Biblical perspective… (Not so ironically, author Mark Perry notes early on in the book that some proponents of slavery pushed the idea that anyone who believed that slavery was wrong could not be a Christian. Hmm…)

  38. Just curious as to why my comments are being moderated? Or are all comments being moderated for this thread? (the latter makes sense to me.)

  39. “This is one big reason why we have been distancing ourselves more and more from the so called “Christian Homeschool Movement”, preferring to be called simply homeschooling parents who are Christian.”

    Laura — The ascendancy of these kinds of men to the leadership of Christian homeschool organizations is why we cancelled our memberships. When Voddie Baucham is your association’s keynote conference speaker three years running, it’s time to bail out.

    “Wilson views rape as the judgement of God on a people(Fidelity: What It Means To Be A One-Woman Man pg 82)”

    Diane — Wow. I don’t even know what to say to that. I wonder if he thinks white slaveowners selling their quadroon daughters to New Orleans brothels was God’s judgement, too. Yeesh.

    “Isn’t it funny how all the macho man theologians lack the balls to call out a racist? And I thought masculine Christianity was all about being tough and saying the hard things and not worrying that you might upset someone or rock the boat.”

    Pam — Maybe these guys give Wilson a pass on his racism since he’s playing so well for their Team Misogyny.

  40. Never Again,

    Please forgive my insensitivity for a comment which was meant to be a caricature of ultra-right-wing-xtian-crazies. I am a long time friend and supporter of the State of Israel, and I have been censured and castigated at various ideologically pure liberal sites for being so.

    The irony here is that I am a liberal (generally speaking) myself in both the theological and political realms.

    Shalom, and once again please forgive my blundering.

  41. A few things:

    1. Mark Noll could demolish Wilson in a second. Oh, wait, he already did. The book is called The Civil War As A Theological Crisis and though it wasn’t addressing Wilson, it talks extensively about the antebellum theological arguments over slavery. Read it for more info on this topic, because Wilson’s “anti-abolitionist” arguments are just the same recycled crap from the 1830s.

    2. When you’re done with that book, read The Scarlet Letter and all of Edmund Morgan’s books on the Puritans and the Massachusetts Bay Colony, because that’s where theonomy/Reconstructionism end up. It wasn’t pretty the first time around and the redux wouldn’t be any better.

    3. Southern slavery basically ignored every single one of the Old Testament slave regulations. First, it was built on kidnapping, a capital offense in the Old Testament (right along with adultery and sodomy); second, Old Testament slaves could not be permanently enslaved (except by choice), let alone enslaved generationally; and third, Old Testament slavery was not race-based. So if Wilson wants to continue trampling all over the Old Testament by defending southern slavery, while at the same time proclaiming himself to be someone who loves and respects “Biblical Law,” more power to him. But he’ll have to forgive me for deeming him a shameless hypocrite.

  42. That’s Matt Chandler?
    He looks like an adolescent. I mean age wise (besides action wise). Baby faced, you know. Not …er… elder material.

  43. Oh, my gosh.

    I own a book by this man.

    You are right, Dee, he and this sort of thinking are very popular in Reformed circles. These sorts of things are the things I have often heard discussed at my church. Even as a theonomist (a doctrine I am currently processing and in the beginning stages of rejecting), these conversations caused me to involuntarily shudder inside. Yet I quietly gave ear to them and thought, “Welll, if the Bible says it, then I guess… maybe…”

    As I puzzle over how I could have even considered this crap, I realized something: You know, when I became Reformed ten years ago, the impression was always given that “we” SERIOUS Christians were a very tiny fraction of the population who don’t stand much of a chance against the wicked culture and the rest of the church that was so full of “nominal” Christians. This meant that anyone who viewed the Bible as we did (a very narrow, hard-line view) was easily accepted as being on our side, and even their shudder-inducing views seemed tolerable because we felt so isolated in the world.

    I wonder if this is still a common perception in these circles? It works well for getting people to swallow some pretty sickening stuff.

  44. Wilson is a white supremacist – no ifs, ands, or buts.
    He needs to be denounced for this, not feted.
    Interesting search results over at the Southern Poverty Law Center’s site here.

    I’m surprised that they don’t have an article on Wilson in their “profiles” section.
    And (ironically or not), I’m currently reading Lift Up Thy Voice: The Grimké Family’s journey from Slaveholders to Civil Rights Leaders. I wonder if Wilson has ever read either of the Grimké sisters’ essays debunking slavery from a Biblical perspective… (Not so ironically, author Mark Perry notes early on in the book that some proponents of slavery pushed the idea that anyone who believed that slavery was wrong could not be a Christian. Hmm…)

  45. OK, re. the comment I made that’s still in the moderation queue… is it because I posted two links in the body of the text? (One to search results on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s site; another to a very interesting book on abolitionism and the Civil rights movement.)

    It would help to know – GBTC, or anyone?

  46. “Wilson views rape as the judgement of God on a people(Fidelity: What It Means To Be A One-Woman Man pg 82)”

    “Diane — Wow. I don’t even know what to say to that. I wonder if he thinks white slaveowners selling their quadroon daughters to New Orleans brothels was God’s judgement, too. Yeesh.”

    The interesting point being the 2 pedophiles from his own church/school were reeking “God’s judegment” on his Christ Church. I don’t think Wilson saw it that way though. Just for others.

    http://books.google.com/books?id=sou32aLhcxgC&pg=PA82&lpg=PA82&dq=doug+wilson+rape+is+god's+judgement&source=bl&ots=b3qFRaqu-u&sig=Y7G5W8z1B8YAU7GN4-h5ki8M1mc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=dY8AUMr3KInnqgGvtsmhBw&ved=0CFkQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=doug%20wilson%20rape%20is%20god's%20judgement&f=false

  47. @ Diane:

    Can you elaborate on that tidbit about his views on rape some more? I’ve never heard that. Probably just more of the same repulsiveness, I’m sure.

  48. Wilson should experience slavery. I have an old house we are redoing. Has a basement he can live in. We will give him some scraps like the potatoes that don’t get fixed in time. I need the labor to dig a trench around my house in the hard clay, so the expanding and contracting soils can, against the house, be maintained at a constant moisture level by draining excess water away to a sump pump. I need to build a retaining wall and need some excavating and leveling and then building with the 20 pound stones. I need a lot of bricks moved and walls built, and excavation to expand the basement to be under the new addition to the house.

    It is really hot here in the summer, sometimes gets to 110 or more. But that is not a uncivil as Texas unairconditioned, unventilated prison cells, where it gets to 130 or more, but we have some shade in some areas here some of the day. So it will be at least as nice as the conditions Wilson thinks the slaves had. And I will not rape his wife or any of his daughters who come with him, like happened by so-called Christian slaveholders. And I won’t use a whip on him as long as he does his work and stays in his place. And I will let him go free when the work is done. I think it will be a good, educational experience for him, so he can honestly say that slave life was not bad, after all he had lived it.

    Btw, the basement is not heated in the winter, but it rarely gets below 20 here in the winter.

  49. I cannot believe the Bayly brothers. I just can’t. The other patriarchs at least TRY to sound credible in public, but the Baylys don’t seem to give a rip. Did anybody else see their “unsheathed swords” article condemning birth control? – “swords,” of course, referring to…uhhhh…well, something else.

  50. That rape passage is just awful, I don’t even know the words to describe how vile it is. It’s also factually wrong. He says rape is more common since women’s liberation. Not true. What has happened, is rape and sexual assault are discussed more, we’re – slowly – working to break down the ‘she asked for it’ line that is so often used against victims, and the laws have changed – it really wasn’t that long ago that the law said a married woman couldn’t be raped by her husband, now we do recognise marital rape. Reported cases are up, yes, but that in a strange way is a GOOD thing. It means we’re trying to stop sweeping sexual abuse under the carpet.

  51. That chapter also shows two other things:
    1. He couldn’t give 2 s***s for women.
    2. He doesn’t know or doesn’t care that men are victims of sexual assault too.

  52. “@ Diane:

    Can you elaborate on that tidbit about his views on rape some more? I’ve never heard that. Probably just more of the same repulsiveness, I’m sure.”

    His words would be better than mine. I am reading this in its entirety-chapter 7 being the one discussing it.

    http://books.google.com/books?id=sou32aLhcxgC&pg=PA82&lpg=PA82&dq=wilson+rape+is+god's+judgement&source=bl&ots=b3qFRcqC-y&sig=nxhIJ_aquwF8sqID7mutuiDEy0c&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ueAAULLuCYKXqAGLi9myDA&ved=0CFMQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=wilson%20rape%20is%20god's%20judgement&f=false

  53. Anon1,

    “It is pretty bad when you feel safer with the heathens than these guys.”

    Said “heathens” are normal human beings who understand “treating people the way they want to be treated” and don’t force it through ideological sieve after sieve until it has completely broken down into powder and is washed away leaving no trace that it ever existed in the first place.

  54. Filling a comment full of links will get you moderated. There are various things that trip up moderation.
    Plus it’s Friday night. We sometimes go out on the town. :)

  55. Pingback: Dominionism: Alive and well | Civil Commotion

  56. "Anon1… You can take shelter in my humble abode in the Washington, D.C. area! I hope you don’t mind the laundry pile and the large model train collection! " . Thanks Eagle. You would be fun. We could read Genesis for Normal People together. (wink) Dee, I think Metzler shut down Pooh's think a few years back. Moscow is a small town and Doug seems to be something of a pasha there.

  57. Oh wow.

    Diane, after reading that appalling quote by Wilson on rape, I went to amazon to read a bunch of book reviews from his some of his books: “Fidelity”, “Reforming Marriage” and “Federal Husband.” I am so shaken up right now… some of these books he apparently even tells his readers not to allow their wives to read. It is obvious from some of the quotes I saw that he does not think it at all important for a man to really try to please his wife, but that it is extremely important for him to bring her into submission to him. This confirms my suspicion of the Patriarchal crowd: A man’s obedience to Eph. 5:25-33 (husbands love your wives) isn’t half as important as a woman’s obedience to Eph. 5:22-24 (wives submit…).

    Why are churches not calling this man out? :-(

  58. Having read the chapter on rape in Wilson’s book…I had to walk away for a bit. The Scripture Twisting(TM) was so familiar it kind of creeped me out just for that.

    Okay, my thoughts. Based on ‘debates’ I’ve had online with hyper-calvinists before, this is the logical outcome of thinking for that ideology. God ordains rape. Even of children. That is what I was told, even after telling my own story. When I told him I did not (nor even could) worship a god that pre-ordained for children to be raped, he pronounced me an apostate athiest in danger of hell and tried all the harder to ‘win me to his theology’. I walked away. In his mind, if I did not believe that God was as this man defined Him, then I didn’t believe in God at all. Sigh.

    Anyway, as disturbing as Wilson’s theology is, it is the logical conclusion to be drawn from Calvinista doctrine – which is part of why it is so insidious and dangerous.

  59. He want to execute people for adultery and homosexual acts (Old Testament law, applied in a way that OT Jews seemed not even to do), but Piper say Doug gets the gospel right?

    Jesus did not execute for adultery.

    Who is right about the gospel: Jesus, or Doug Wilson? (Rethorical question.)

  60. @Eagle
    “the silence of the rest of the Christian community really means that they approve of his theology and views on slavery. ”

    No. This is a theme you bring up at times. What he does is not against the law. Yelling about him and others constantly give them press which gives them more attraction to a certain class of people. So when it comes up we talk about it. But responding to every comment by people like him is counter productive.

  61. Now we move on up to Moscow, Idaho, which appears to be the base for Wilson’s empire. It is of interest to note that the Aryan Nation, a white supremacist group appears to have quite a few ties to this area of Idaho.

    Same reason as Unabomber holed up as a hermit in rural Montana. Idaho and Montana are mostly uninhabited, and if you want to set up well away from anyone else, that’s the place to do it. Lotsa crazy hermits up there, both solitary and in groups.

    They said that Wilson/Wilkins argued that “southern slavery was not only sanctioned by the Bible but, thanks to the patriarchal kindness of their wise evangelical masters, a positive, happy, and pleasant experience for the majority of southern blacks.”

    Translation: GOD Hath Commanded and Blessed Our Peculiar Institution Regarding Certain Animate Property.

    I heard someone tell me about Traditionalist factions within Islam who teach the same thing.

    “Rather, Wilson seeks to revive the memory—however rose-tinted—of eras in Western history when faith and reason seemed at one, when family, church, and the organic “community of Christians” that T. S. Eliot describes in Christianity and Culture were more powerful than the state. When Wilson says that the mission of NSA is to “save civilization,” this is his meaning.”

    Except his Godly Golden Age is Act I of Gone With The Wind or Birth of a Nation instead of Ozzie & Harriet?

    And his mission is To Save Civilization? Mix in “God Hath Said” and you’ve ramped it up to Cosmic Importance. Right up there with the Taliban and/or Khmer Rouge; all that’s missing is the coup. Because such a Righteous Goal as Saving Civilization and God’s Will can justify any atrocity in bringing it about.

    “Wilson and Wilkins argued that if Christians admit that the Bible’s treatment of slavery may be outdated, it’s only a short way down the slippery slope of relativism toward relinquishing the Bible’s teaching on homosexuality and other hot issues.”

    Playing the Fag Card? First Abolitionism, then Homosexuality? Just like Evolution leads to Homosexuality?

    Guess that Chinese Dragon made of mismatched parts with the bullhorn was right: “CRAZY IS NOW THE ORDER OF THE DAY.”

  62. Okay, my thoughts. Based on ‘debates’ I’ve had online with hyper-calvinists before, this is the logical outcome of thinking for that ideology. God ordains rape. Even of children. That is what I was told, even after telling my own story. When I told him I did not (nor even could) worship a god that pre-ordained for children to be raped, he pronounced me an apostate athiest in danger of hell and tried all the harder to ‘win me to his theology’. — Jeanette Altes

    Utter Predestination. Your fate written on your forehead before the creation of the world. In’shal’lah…

  63. @numo
    GTBC – two links, though?
    More than that I can understand.

    As I said. Details will not be disclosed. And there are a lot of criteria.

    But we only seem to trip the moderation bit about once or twice a week around here. You’ve used up the quota for the week.

  64. Jeanette? I just read your “Okay, my thoughts” above aloud to my roommate.

    His response, word for word: “Walked away nothing — I’d have punched his F’in lights out.”

  65. gbtc – am not trying to get you to spill the beans – more like trying to figure out how to avoid this in future.

  66. When you’re done with that book, read The Scarlet Letter and all of Edmund Morgan’s books on the Puritans and the Massachusetts Bay Colony, because that’s where theonomy/Reconstructionism end up. — Hester

    No, read The Handmaid’s Tale. Or anything about the Ayatollahs of Iran or the Talibani.

    Theonomy/Reconstructionism = Handmaid’s Tale as How-to Manual.

    That’s Matt Chandler?
    He looks like an adolescent. I mean age wise (besides action wise). Baby faced, you know. Not …er… elder material. — Mara

    Well, Mark Driscoll looks like a pudgy kid with kewpie-doll hair in a Mickey Mouse T-shirt, so maybe it’s part of Being Godly.

  67. HUG – tell your roommate thanks. :-)

    I have been thinking about the last part of Wilson’s chapter on this subject. So….he believes the part of the whole ‘biblical roles’ packages is the concept of ‘authority and submission’ and he makes no bones about what he is talking about – sex. He equates the ‘authority and submission’ of ‘the marriage bed’ with the law of gravity. I’m sorry if the following quote makes some squeamish, but it is straight out of his book…

    “A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts.”

    And….

    “True authority and true submission are therefore an erotic necessity.”

    Does anyone else here see in this the implication that sex itself was designed to be a violent conquering act and women were designed to submit to it? This man is sick. He is justifying rape. How is this supposed to mirror the relationship between us (God’s children) and God? I wonder if he really see God in that way?

    I have to say that if that is his view of sex, I pity his wife.

  68. That 'Fifty Shades of Grey' article is vile. "When we quarrel with the way the world is, we find that the world has ways of getting back at us. In other words, however we try, the sexual act cannot be made into an egalitarian pleasuring party. A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts. This is of course offensive to all egalitarians, and so our culture has rebelled against the concept of authority and submission in marriage. This means that we have sought to suppress the concepts of authority and submission as they relate to the marriage bed." Eeewww. Jeanette, yes I see that the obvious thing to extrapolate from that quote is that sex itself is a conquering act for a man, an act that humiliates and subjugates women. He appears to have a very adolescent view of sex if he sees it that way.

  69. Okay….this has stirred me up so….I have a question. If….

    “Violent rape is God’s judgement upon a culture, and individual women who are a part of that culture are included in the judgment.”

    ….and….

    “In other words, however we try, the sexual act cannot be made into an egalitarian pleasuring party. A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts.”

    ….then is the sex he seems to be describing for marriage God’s judgment on marriage?

    Hmmm…one of the most personally disturbing things about this is that as I read the thing, the religious training I received growing up and in the ‘church’ I used to belong to started trying to tell me that this wasn’t that far off and wasn’t that unreasonable. AAARRRGGHHHH!!!!!

    That training can haunt us for a long time. Sigh.

  70. Pam said

    “Isn’t it funny how all the macho man theologians lack the balls to call out a racist? And I thought masculine Christianity was all about being tough and saying the hard things and not worrying that you might upset someone or rock the boat. I guess my silly ladybrain was wrong.”

    Yeah, seems like their courage is limited to participation in church-arranged cage fights and not anything involving true risk or honour.

  71. Eagle

    Thanks for your discussion of the historiography of slavery. When I first read this post, Eugene Genovese’s ‘Roll, Jordan, Roll’ came to mind and then I saw that you mentioned it. I read it in a graduate class on history and theory (that week we discussed Genovese’s application of Gramsci and Hegel).

    You’re right. Doug Wilson isn’t writing history. He’s churning out hateful propaganda.

  72. “Whenever I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally.”

    That’s what I think when men vocally defend patriarchy and women’s submission.

    (Please know that I’m not making a direct comparison between slaves’ experience and the experience of women in the church. But there are ideological parallels.)

  73. Jan:

    you said: “You know, when I became Reformed ten years ago, the impression was always given that “we” SERIOUS Christians were a very tiny fraction of the population who don’t stand much of a chance against the wicked culture and the rest of the church that was so full of “nominal” Christians. This meant that anyone who viewed the Bible as we did (a very narrow, hard-line view) was easily accepted as being on our side, and even their shudder-inducing views seemed tolerable because we felt so isolated in the world. I wonder if this is still a common perception in these circles? It works well for getting people to swallow some pretty sickening stuff.”

    A bit off topic, guys, but I wanted to comment on something.

    What you very clearly described breeds something very insidious and which, I think, is at the base of many of the problems discussed in TWW: pride.

    I already mentioned in previous comments that I spent most of my life in a religious group where that attitude was foundational: from the beginning we were the ones who got it right and kept all commandments, apart from the corrupted churches of the world. Of course there were true “Christians” in those churches, but by the end of times they would come to us. From its inception this particular church was small, in the fringes, and to make matters worse it was born out of a fringe movement. That and other kookiness helped in the formation of many other fringe groups, more or less associated with the main group and proposing all sorts of crazy things.

    That “separateness” made many become proud. Especially the highest you climbed the “corporate ladder”, as that was a sign of status within the group’s culture. Often it depended more on who you knew “up there” to help you go up rather than in skills or merits. You always heard one or two rumours of how things worked in the different institutions of the church, but the most important corruption cases at the top were always played down a lot and news were blurred when they reached the congregations. Not wanting to rock the boat, I guess, and jeopardise the millions given in tithes and offering each year.

    However, I do believe that the pride happened even at the most basic level and it blinded you to things that might be wrong… Or you might see it but, in your mind, couldn’t accept that such fine and godly institution is so rotten. Then the “cognitive dissonance” would trigger and you’d come with different ways to deal with it: denial and blame put on those who leave or criticise (“You’re bitter!”, “someone in the church hurt you and you want revenge” or “that person never was one of us”) and then coming up with some new theory that puts all the pieces back in place again. But the truth is that, for many, that “cognitive dissonance” would ultimately produce fear, frustration, anxiety and depression.

    I wouldn’t be surprised that similar things happen in circles as those you’ve mentioned.

  74. Jeannette Altes , your Sat Jul 14, 2012 at 02:44 AM comparison is brilliant!

    In his comment how sex cannot be egalitarian, I wonder if he consider the 1st letter to the Corinthians (1 Cor 7:4) saying the man do not have authority over his own body, but the woman does? Probably not. When the Bible is not supportive of misogyny, their sort chuck the Bible rather than the misogyny.

  75. I checked in here first thing this morning, and got a bit confused and uncomfortable. I wanted to comment, and wrote several but kept coming up empty. I can’t believe anyone would write what that man wrote about slaves. I can’t bring myself to type his name. I kept thinking that maybe he’d watched “Places In The Heart”, and saw Sally Fields character as some sort of Jesus figure. But I loved that movie, and can’t imagine anyone using that to justify slavery.

    I gave up on trying to comment, and went over a to FBC WD and read about Ed Young. I got angry, then I got sick. His comment about going on a mission trip(in reference to securing God’s financial favor), and I kinda felt like I got kicked in the stomach. I made the mistake of looking at the photos posted of his house, and was amazed, and not in a good sense. I live in a mold infested flat, have to walk around human feces to get to my elevator(granted, that’s a really bad day, but reality), and walk my down dog streets where spiritual warfare isn’t something invisible, like in those Peretti books(however you spell that name).

    But I knew I had to get away from the world of ‘christianity’.

    So I shut down my computer, hopped on my bike, and hoped that loosing myself in a sea of millions of Asians would help me get back in touch with a ‘higher purpose’. It kind of worked.

    But having spent some time back here, I’m more confused than ever. I even put my head down on my desk and cried a while. The more I read, the more depressing it becomes. So please, someone correct me and tell me that I misunderstood that Pope Piper praises that man heinous man who wrote about rape. That the Calvanistas, and their College of Cardinals have since, taken a stand against his affection for men who rape little girls, and allows them to attend his bible college/seminary…I’m not sure what it’s called. Please tell me that I’m terribly confused, and that it’s not as bad as it seems.

    Please tell me that this entire blog, the comments, and links are all just another one of my crazy nightmares. Please tell me that this is NOT accepted behavior amongst mainstream Christianity. PLEASE?!?

  76. It just got worse. Just read where Mike McQuery is suing Penn State. Do these people have no shame at all!?

  77. numo

    All comments are being moederated but we are just slow. I have been on vacation and I am helping my daughter move to an apartment. So we are just slow. I am so sorry.

  78. jack

    This should make you feel better. Hubby and I attended Ed Young’s church back inthe early 90s.My daughter palyed with theirs.  We gave money to that nonsnese. We probably paid for those crosses over the front door. So, at least you avoided giving him money, unlike us.  Better to live humbly than end up like him.

  79. Jack,
    As someone above said, (not in these terms) Doug Wilson is a such a whack-job extraordinaire… he’s so far gone, so far lost to anything resembling Christianity, that his type is best ignored so as not to be given any credibility.

    In fact, in the past I refused to ever mention his name on my blog.
    I just picked on Piper and Driscoll because they at least (I thought) had some level of decency even though I disagreed with their Calvinista tendencies and chauvinism. I picked on them in order expose the error of their misguided souls in these areas.

    But now these guys, guys like Piper and Driscoll, they are giving Wilson credibility, calling him brilliant and everyone else dumb.

    And it is shocking.

    It is shocking and makes me question whether or not Piper and Driscoll are really whack-jobs who just haven’t been fully come out yet. And this really does disturb me.

    Because for all my ranting and raving about Piper and Driscoll, I really did feel that these men actually had SOME good things to offer the body of Christ in spite of the areas where they are off.

    Now I’m standing and watching, wondering, what the heck has happened that they say the ravings of a mad man is getting the gospel right.

  80. My thoughts on the Wilson rape chapter:

    1. Some of his Scripture references to prove that God uses rape as a judgment didn’t follow (esp. that Eccelesiastes one).

    2. He basically blamed egalitarians for all sexual perversion in society. That’s just plain wrong.

    3. I’m not sure his “conquering” attitude toward normal marital sex is healthy.

    4. I worry that, in light of that attitude about marital sex, that he doesn’t believe in marital rape. Here’s his definition: “When a man has intercourse with a woman contrary to the laws of marriage, and she is unwilling, a rape has been committed.” Whether he believes in marital rape depends on what he means by “the laws of marriage.” In light of the fact that he only discusses the rape of single women and the rape of married women by men other than their husbands, I have to wonder if he thinks husbands are unable to rape their wives “under the Law.” And if that’s true, it says A LOT about what he thinks authority/submission look like.

    5. I worry that he would be okay with kids getting married WAY too young. He talks about statutory rape, but only in light of abduction and blatant pedophilia (i.e., intercourse with prepubescent children). What happens if a 14-year-old wants to marry a 17-year-old? In Biblical times that would have been just fine, so logically, in light of “it is better to marry than to burn,” just let them get married, right? We don’t somebody getting RAPED, after all.

    (I can tell you from personal experience that really young marriage/dating/courtship is not considered a problem in some conservative circles, so Wilson being okay with it would not be unusual. People in these groups seem to forget about the age of consent. When confronted about it, they assure you that “nothing’s going to happen” – even though if something does, the older party could legally be listed as child molester. And since ~%90 of purity vows are broken, I think it’s never safe to assume that “nothing’s going to happen” just because the two kids involved are Christians.)

  81. Dee said: “I will do more on Wilson soon.”

    Dee, I can tell you the fruits of Wilsonian worship, because my children went to a classical Christian school in the mold of his Logos school. The changes I saw in people from year 1 to year 6 were distressing. If you need fodder, email me.

  82. On this Doug Wilson, rape/marriage and slavery thing.
    As mentioned above, the man has NO empathy, something that Jesus had and promoted (do unto others as you would have them do unto you).

    Since he’s in the position to NOT be a slave, he can be hard and calloused and say being a slave isn’t so bad.
    Since he’s not a woman, he can be hard and calloused and claim that women must be conquered and surrendered (to a man rather than Jesus).

    Because Wilson (in his mind) gets to do the penetrating rather than having to accept it, it is no problem at all to tell others that they have to accept what he does not have to.

    Seeing all this laid out by everyone here, I’d like to dedicate a song to Wilson.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDBmRbBfRns

    The line to note in particular is “I’d rather be a hammer than a nail”
    Wilson would rather be an oppressor than the oppressed and he only sees that it can be this way. He can’t see that no one in the Kingdom of God is to take the position of oppressor or oppressed. Those taking the position of oppressor disobey God.

    Therefore I’d like to also dedicate a verse to him.

    John 1:5 The Light shines in the darkness and the darkness did not comprehend it.

    Wilson is steeped in darkness ignoring the words of Jesus who said.

    Luke 22:25 “The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who have authority over them are called ‘Benefactors.’ 26 But it is not this way with you, but the one who is the greatest among you must become like the youngest, and the leader like the servant. 27 For who is greater, the one who reclines at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who reclines at the table? But I am among you as the one who serves.

    Wilson tries to use the gospel to make himself a king in his world. He is clueless that he is disobedient to Jesus in his pursuits. Wilson walks in darkness.

  83. Hi Dee,

    No need to be perplexed at all. This is merely a logical extension of their Calvinist beliefs. Given what we know about how they think about their totally depraved laity, is it too much of a stretch to believe that they would consider the subjugation of any people as a god-given right of those “standing in the stead”? I mean, if they are “standing in the stead of God”, how much more do they reserve the right to claim mastership over others in whatever form it may manifest itself in? Whether it be spiritual mastery, or physical, or whatever…their claims to our lives even now makes slavery every bit as Biblical…they are obligated to regard slavery as appropriate; to oppose it would in fact make them doctrinal hypocrites. Slavery, therefore, is a mere extension of their rights as God’s sole arbiters of divine revelation. (By the way; the word for this kind of thinking is gnosticism.)

    Think about it. They already claim ownership of our marriages, finances, and life decisions. Congregations are expected to fund the very church that refuses to honestly consider their input in even the most insignificant of church-related issues. And we are surprised that they agree with slavery? Well…as long as it’s done by the benevolent master, of course (…can we say complementarianism? Same argument…oppression is fine as long as the motives are “good”; by a “loving” and “sound doctrine”-oriented master/husband/pastor/king/emperor…etc., etc.).

    People have got to understand that it isn’t the men, it’s the doctrine. It’s the “sound doctrine” of their father Johnny C. which leads them to these conclusions. Read Calvin’s Institutes. See his utter disdain for humanity; even more for those who disagree with him. It’s not that these men are unqualified leaders of their churches, as Brent Detwiler would have you believe. No, the problem is that they practice Calvinism with almost complete perfection! Brent has it wrong. CJ isn’t unqualified…he’s eminently qualified! His treatment of Brent and everyone else is in perfect keeping with SGM’s doctrine. The SGM Board is correct! Given what they believe, they are completely within their rights, theologically speaking, to run the church the way they are running it. They are the masters, we are the slaves.

    See? Nothing to be perplexed about. It all makes perfect sense. :-)

  84. Argo -

    It only makes sense if John Calvin (or your preferred doctrine) is your god and Jesus Christ takes a back seat!

    I’ll add that talk about Jesus comes easy to these men but following him is another matter. They appear to prefer following the patriarchs than the King of Kings. Jesus was God in the flesh . . . the patriarchs were mere men.

  85. Jeannette – Yes. Men like Wilson believe the Christian life is about authority/submission = force. I'm beginning to think that many people look for the doctrine that suits their personnel preferences, rather than being conformed to the image of Christ. They search the scripture to justify their belief system. Jesus is is not often quoted by these men except as a means of salvation. Jesus came into the world and and initiated a New Covenant, turning the patriarch's world upside down. He was nothing like a patriarch . . . from what I see of Doug Wilson and what he writes, he is not a great deal like Jesus.

  86. On Wilson’s description of sex (yes, I noticed how horrible on so many levels his language was there), I wonder if he realises that seeing sex as an inherently violent act of male domination is pretty much the most radical feminist of radical feminist ideas.

  87. I was curious as to what Wilson himself would now say on slavery. If you listen to him, he simply seems to be a ridiculously philosophical individual who should probably be in a Philosophy Department teaching. He misses the evils that brought about slavery in his discussion and instead focuses on what to do to end the evils. He is actually quite nuanced (though I still disagree with him) in this video. http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D8y0fTaMBESs&v=8y0fTaMBESs&gl=US

  88. Hey Bridget,

    You are right, and I agree! For the record, and in case I haven’t been clear (I hope I have! :-) ), I’m opposed to Calvinism–in all of its forms: orthodox, historical, contemporary versions, what have you. In reading Calvin’s Institutes, his contempt for humanity is palpable. When we understand where men like Wilson and Piper are coming from, and what’s at the core of their world view/philosophy, we realize that NONE of this should come as a surprise…except as what comes as a shock to most normal people…people whose basic human compassion and sensitivities haven’t been dulled or contorted by years of exposure to the neo-Calvinist “sound doctrine”. I mean, even the unsaved revile at this kind of revisionist history…which is puzzling given the fact that they are supposed to be totally depraved and incapable of recognizing “good” and of showing contempt for “bad”.

    Look, I understand there are many vagaries, many disputable aspects to the Civil War and the events leading up to it. And I think that most historians, no matter which side they are on, can see that Reconstruction was not the North’s finest hour, and perhaps was at least tangentially responsible for some of the atrocities we saw against blacks in the South post-war. It is also clear that racism is, and never has been limited to the southeast in this country (as a quick review of Aryan Nation on Wikipedia will reveal that the headquarters have been found in Idaho, New York, and Pennsylvania; and that Malcom X in his autobiography claimed that the racism of the North was more insidious than in the South). We can even have a rational discussion of the constitutionality of the North’s military actions against the South and the South’s right to secede. But declaring slavery an institution which promotes “peace and Christian brotherhood” among peoples is downright ludicrous. Oh, sure…there’s peace. In the same sense that there is much objective “peace” when one group of men is lined up against a wall by another group of men with machine guns.

  89. Jeannette said-

    “Does anyone else here see in this the implication that sex itself was designed to be a violent conquering act and women were designed to submit to it? This man is sick. He is justifying rape. How is this supposed to mirror the relationship between us (God’s children) and God?”

    Yes-I see it. I was nauseated and shaken after reading the Wilson quote TGC’s Jared Wilson posted…with Jared seemingly agreeing with it. Not so much the quote that made me sick, disgusting as it is (having mired in the muck of all things Wilson for a few months last fall, I have come to expect anything and everything from him) but the fact that many were able to read that on TGC’s website and think–well…if Jared thinks that’s ok…well- ok. Jared really didn’t offer much of an opinion on what HE thought- other than he found it relevant. He did not offer anything negative though.

    “Okay….this has stirred me up so….I have a question. If….

    Violent rape is God’s judgement upon a culture, and individual women who are a part of that culture are included in the judgment.”

    ….and….

    “In other words, however we try, the sexual act cannot be made into an egalitarian pleasuring party. A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts.”

    ….then is the sex he seems to be describing for marriage God’s judgment on marriage?”

    Yes and no. That’s a Wilson answer for you, btw. It is judgement for others, not his own marriage or his own church. Just like he thinks pedophiles who molest young toddlers (Sitler) deserve death…and rape is God’s judgement on a people (all while two molesters were ravaging/raping his church), these are true except at his church. Instead, Sitler got a letter from Wilson with a plea for leniency and a declaration of Sitler’s “complete honesty” and eager repentance, full support from Wilson, a very good attorney and a courtship marriage last year.

    Mara wrote-

    “Now I’m standing and watching, wondering, what the heck has happened that they say the ravings of a mad man is getting the gospel right.”

    Also…delving into one’s character = gossip and slander. The sheeple are NOT to do that. God’s annointed and all that. If one says Jesus, cross and Spurgeon-then he has the gospel right, it would seem. I personally do not understand how these leaders do it– ignore practice and simply cling to what men say or the books they write, but they do. They do not think he’s mad…a little bit “out there” maybe, but since he says cross and Jesus he is in. That and male headship. He is one of them. He’s on their side.

    Jack wrote-

    “The more I read, the more depressing it becomes. So please, someone correct me and tell me that I misunderstood that Pope Piper praises that man heinous man who wrote about rape. That the Calvanistas, and their College of Cardinals have since, taken a stand against his affection for men who rape little girls, and allows them to attend his bible college/seminary…I’m not sure what it’s called.”

    It is depressing, yet you can be very grateful you are able to see through this. I am thankful that I am not in a church like Wilson’s and I hope that as people shed light on men’s characters and how they live and love in the name of Jesus (NOT soley focusing on their doctrine–angels of light and all that), that people will see the disconnect and start to question.

  90. This guy nauseates me. I wouldn’t allow him to preach to my cat. (Of course, the cat is probably Unitarian.) I’m just tired of this kind of lunacy being told off as representative of Christ. IT IS NOT. He’s turned the meek lamb of God into a triumphalist roman conqueror complete with male centurions and female slaves.

  91. Argo said, “People have got to understand that it isn’t the men, it’s the doctrine. It’s the “sound doctrine” of their father Johnny C. which leads them to these conclusions.”
    You cleared something for me. I’ve been feeling a bit overwhelmed and perplexed thinking Doug Wilson, wondering how he got to be like this. I knew Doug’s earthly father, and attended his (arminian Evangelical Free) church for about a year, long ago. I can’t remember anything like this from him. In fact, Doug’s parents always focused their ministry on international students of all races, colors (and genders). I’d been wondering how the apple fell so far from that tree. But now I see! Doug went down this track after coming under the spiritual fatherhood of good ol’ Johnny C!
    About 10 years ago my daughters were visiting Christ Church looking for a college church home, and I encouraged them, naively assuming the son would be a sound teacher like his Dad had been. I had no idea what was being taught there. Thank God I wasn’t a “patriarch” or I might have forced my daughters to “join”. But of course, in that case, I wouldn’t have allowed them to go to college! We did have them read all the Elsie Dinsmore books when they were younger, which I now regret…..
    I know some of you have been toying with throwing all Eye Duh Hoe under the bus due to Rev Doug– thanks for your restraint! Just like Washington DC, as Eagle said, there be a few good people here too!

  92. John Piper says (start at about the 7 minute mark for context):

    “This is the least ambiguous person I’ve ever known- sitting over here (points to Doug Wilson) except when he wants to be ambiguous, uh, which he always does in one sense…(laughing and chuckling) you just have to know him…you have to know him.”

    http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2012/02/03/a-two-hour-conversation-between-john-piper-and-doug-wilson/

    I guess I shall never know what Wilson means on any given sugject due to his ambiguity…unless I can know him. But I cannot know him, yet Piper can—so trust in Piper.

    Yep. Isn’t that amazing.

  93. Pam – when I read Wilson’s description of sex, the first thing that came to my mind was something my philosophy lecturer said – she was talking about feminism and how this particular feminist had asserted that all sex was inherently degrading to women.

  94. That ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’ article is vile. “When we quarrel with the way the world is, we find that the world has ways of getting back at us. In other words, however we try, the sexual act cannot be made into an egalitarian pleasuring party. A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts. This is of course offensive to all egalitarians, and so our culture has rebelled against the concept of authority and submission in marriage. This means that we have sought to suppress the concepts of authority and submission as they relate to the marriage bed.”

    All that’s missing is after you rape the woman, have her executed for Adultery or Fornication. After all, if she weren’t such a Jezebel….

    Just like that video from Afghanistan.

    And as for Fifty Shades of Grey, it IS a runaway best-seller so everybody and his dog is trying to jump on the bandwagon. On a recent Internet Monk thread about the Jesus Junk store scene, I speculated how long before the Christianese Bandwagon Knockoff industry comes out with “Just like Fifty Shades of Grey, Except CHRISTIAN(TM)!”

    Then another commenter told us it’s already underway — there’s this Christian(TM) blog called “Fifty Shades of Grace”…

  95. @ Jan:

    Yes, there is definitely a mindset within the Reformed community that they are a poor minority of Christendom having to trudge resolutely onward, not only through the general heathen culture but also the mostly Arminian culture of American evangelicalism. I got that vibe right away and I only self-described as Calvinist for about three and a half years.

  96. Remember when you are researching these turkeys that Doug Wilson is seperate from Doug Phillips but both are equally prominent in homeschooling circles and have the same patriarchal mindset.

  97. Gee, these manly men can’t figure out the right side of slavery, confuse marital sex with rape, don’t have the guts to turn in child rapists and have the audacity to look in the mirror and determine that which stares back is not only better than half the people on earth but qualified for leadership.

    Lets see….they’re niave enough to take an, “I’m sorry” from a pediphile but think women are easily deceived.

    They can’t figure out that slavery is evil but want to teach us what God has to say in scripture?

    Have the audacity to damn homosexuals but think rape and marital sex are God’s punishment but……

    The church is supposed to have a masculine feel.

    How would they know when every action they take in word, deed, or omission speaks of compensating for shortcomings or lack of equipment at all.

    You could randomly pick a woman out of the entire population and I doubt you would be governed any worse than one of these narcissists (sp).

  98. Bridget said: “They search the scripture to justify their belief system. Jesus is not often quoted by these men accept as a means of salvation.”

    Great observation, Bridget. Can anyone recall a comp/calvinist/patriarch quoting from the Gospels to support his doctrine? OT – definitely, epistles & Revelation – often, but Gospels – not so much.

  99. Interesting observations.

    I would agree with Response to Just Stopping By re Doug Wilson. He reminds me of one of those philosophers who thinks (and says) the unthinkable, just as, say, Peter Singer did with animal liberation (let me clarify that I disagree with both men). Like Singer, I suspect Wilson doesn’t worry about the practical outworking of his ideas or the unpleasantness to which they can lead. A philosophy department would be ideal for him. However (to go back to Dostoyevsky’s Brothers Karamazov again), thinking the unthinkable or unspeakable can be dangerous sometimes (although one has to be careful not to let that itself become an argue for censorship!). Ivan Karamazov’s musings that “without God, everything is permitted” form the idea in the half-brother, Smerdyakov, of murdering their father.

    Re Calvin, I confess I have not read his Institutes so cannot comment very authoritatively other than what I know of his history. Some of Calvin’s defenders claim that it was his subsequent followers who pushed predestination to a logical extreme, and most orthodox Calvinists would, I suspect, reject the doctrines of “hyper-Calvinism”. Francis Schaeffer, although taught in the Reformed school, disagreed with the sort of theological determinism that saw every (or almost every) choice as predetermined and that left no room for intercession, only for thanksgiving and confession.

  100. Re Jenny’s remark, I have noticed that in Reform circles, the Pauline letters are very popular. However that is just my own personal observation. I would interested in any clarification on this by Lynne from Australia.

  101. Wow. First I’d heard of this guy, but I’m mostly out of the evangelical loop, and glad of it when I see things like this. Things have regressed. Twenty years ago this would have been a no-brainer theological call and the vast majority of evangelical pastors would have roundly and vocally rejected this kind of pro-slavery propaganda and the people like Doug Wilson who bring it. For evangelicals to sit silently while all kinds of crazy like this goes on will destroy any credibility they might have in bringing the gospel message or being a witness. This is already happening.

  102. Kolya,

    “I have noticed that in Reform circles, the Pauline letters are very popular.”

    Definitely. I journalled several years ago when my (Reformed) church was in an uproar, that it seemed to me like everyone prided themselves on being “bold” like Paul while no one seemed to see the need to imitate Christ. Thing is, Paul himself was quite a humble man, and that aspect of him is never talked about. I’m so tired of all these puffed-up little “Pauls” strutting around and offending people unapologetically for the sake of their “gospel.”

  103. “I have noticed that in Reform circles, the Pauline letters are very popular.”

    Bingo!!! And this is big. But here is the deal. We cannot understand Paul UNLESS we know Jesus Christ. We advise those coming out of spiritual abuse situations to read nothing but the Gospels for 3 years, prayerfully seeking the Holy Spirit to illuminate. KNOW JESUS. And not just about Him but KNOW HIM. Then Paul is perfectly understandable and you wil never read him the same way again.

  104. “In reading Calvin’s Institutes, his contempt for humanity is palpable. When we understand where men like Wilson and Piper are coming from, and what’s at the core of their world view/philosophy, we realize that NONE of this should come as a surprise…except as what comes as a shock to most normal people…people whose basic human compassion and sensitivities haven’t been dulled or contorted by years of exposure to the neo-Calvinist “sound doctrine”. I mean, even the unsaved revile at this kind of revisionist history…which is puzzling given the fact that they are supposed to be totally depraved and incapable of recognizing “good” and of showing contempt for “bad”. ”

    Amen. What is missing? LOVE.

    Calvin was a dictatorial brute thug his second time around in Geneva.

    And if you notice on the other threads (or is it this one) quotes from books of Piper, Packer and others they have literally changed words in interpretations from love to lead. I see this all the time in Calvinist interpretations. They change defintions and word meanings. The question is why? Do they know they are doing it? Are they disillusioned? ( 1Thess) What is going on? It is so subtle you have to be on your toes to catch it and most don’t or it is long after they are sold out to this system.

  105. Jesus the human being and the Christ is very knowable. The bible is good. But you and Jesus can get to know each other apart from Paul’s writings. He’s very available. I often think of Abraham, a friend of God. How’d that happen? By taking on a Pauline epistle each week, half a chapter a day? I don’t think so.

  106. Way back near the top someone talked about the issue of Wilson being “mainstreamed” in part through the endorsement of people like Piper.

    This is a huge problem which we have seen before with FIC, Vision Forum, Patriarchy, Reconstructionism, Creation Science, Anti-Vaccination, etc.

    Homeschool conferences and catalogs provided a major entry point for these infections. Most of these people were extremely fringe players whose reach was limited to their AOL website and would have remained so had it not been for the platform they were given at such events. Initially resistant churches and leaders were either won over, replaced, or aged out of ministry.

    When you see leaders from these groups invited into the SBC, or publicly endorsed by the likes of Piper, you know mainstreaming has been achieved. Dissents have been largely limited to John MacArthur, who is himself rapidly (and sadly imo) being reduced to a marginal player through both age and the ascent of the YRR megachurch types.

  107. Anon1 “Then Paul is perfectly understandable and you wil never read him the same way again.”

    Amen!! Paul had one of the most dramatic conversions in scripture and what a turn-around! He would never contradict nor marginalize the words of Jesus! We need to read Paul’s words with this in mind.

  108. @Dee. I’d be happy to write a post. At the moment I am trying to regroup after a major computer meltdown yesterday and work around spotty internet service (new Comcast installation gone bad, very bad). Feel free to contact me via the email that I fill in to comment on this blog and let me know what kind of timeframe you have in mind.

  109. Anon 1 said: “We advise those coming out of spiritual abuse situations to read nothing but the Gospels for 3 years, prayerfully seeking the Holy Spirit to illuminate. KNOW JESUS. And not just about Him but KNOW HIM.”

    So, so true! I’m reminded of a bumper sticker that was popular around here after the L.A. riots: “No Jesus, no peace. Know Jesus, know peace.” Knowing the real Jesus helps us avoid the idols that false teachers attempt to get us to worship.

    Anon 1 also said: “… quotes from books of Piper, Packer and others [in which] they have literally changed words in interpretations from love to lead. I see this all the time in Calvinist interpretations. They change defintions and word meanings. The question is why? Do they know they are doing it?”

    This is what I’ve been wondering for a long time. Are they deliberately dodging self evident meanings of things to maintain the illusion of their “correct” doctrine, or are they so blindly committed to their idols of Calvin, comp. and patriarchy that their logic filter is broken?

  110. Anon1,

    could you give some specific examples of those changes in meanings and definitions that you mentioned? I haven’t realised of any, but I’m not saying those haven’t been made… Maybe it’s because English is not my mother tongue that some of that stuff may go unnoticed.

  111. Regarding Wilson’s repulsive views on rape and sexuality, his denial of “egalitarianism” in the husband-wife sexual relationship is an EXPLICIT denial of scripture. It doesn’t get any clearer than this passage.

    1 Cor 7:3-5 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

    Let me point out that one verse again: “Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.”

    The American Puritans, while very far from perfect, were Wilson’s betters in every way, and understood exactly what this passage meant. Not unusual in the court records of the Puritan era are cases in which wives brought their husbands before the magistrate for…er…failure to perform!

    Wilson knows this of course. But it doesn’t fit with his delusional worldview, so it must be concealed.

  112. TBD said: “When you see leaders from these groups invited into the SBC, or publicly endorsed by the likes of Piper, you know mainstreaming has been achieved. Dissents have been largely limited to John MacArthur, who is himself rapidly (and sadly imo) being reduced to a marginal player through both age and the ascent of the YRR megachurch types.”

    All of these fringe group leaders have become hot commodities in the Christian homeschool circle. Curriculum sellers and convention organizers make a lot of money off of them (just TRY to find Christian curricula that aren’t Reformed, comp. or YEC), and the homeschool parents who subscribe to their teachings are the people coming up into church leadership now. And don’t imagine that MacArthur is standing in the gap in defense of historic Christian orthodoxy. A great deal of the YRR contagion is coming out of his own Master’s College and Seminary. He had Baucham speak at his Shepherds’ Conference, and Mahaney was featured at Resolved 2012. Commitment to “correct” doctrine appears to make for strange bedfellows.

  113. “could you give some specific examples of those changes in meanings and definitions that you mentioned? I haven’t realised of any, but I’m not saying those haven’t been made… Maybe it’s because English is not my mother tongue that some of that stuff may go unnoticed.”

    Dave AA (I think) gave a few examples from Piper and Packer on another thread and I don’t have time to search for them but he quoted sources. But it was the same thing I was seeing when reading their books that took me a while to catch.

    I also did not realize when I was reading Piper, Packer, and others years ago when I was studying Calvinism that they have different definitions to Total Depravity (actually means total inability and imputed guilt for Adam’s sin)

    They have different definitions for Justicifaction in that they tend to subtly merge it with sanctification. This is why they call everything Gospel this and Gospel that. Justification is not a one time deal with them. It is ongoing. And how can you grow in Holiness when you continue to be depraved and are stuck at the Cross? In some cases like Tullian they have Jesus obeying for you with their definition of “Imputed Righteouness” because you can do nothing. one thing I see missing from many Calvinista teaching is the Holy Spirit in a believers life.

    Listen to them closely and ask yourself, Who are they talking to and about? For example, Piper’s vid concerning a “woman should take abuse for a season”. Who was he talking TO and he never once mentions if the abuser is a professing believer or not. Is that a big deal? Yes, I think it is. If the abuser is a professing believer then the abuser has a huge problem and perhaps may not be saved. But Piper never once mentions that aspect. It is just about the woman and what she should take.

    I noticed this all the time and it made no sense to me. Why would long time Christians be practicing sin? (And it is the practicing part we need to heed as in 1 John and Hebrews 10). It is a lack of teaching on what sanctification really is about.

    There is more but I wil stop boring you now. :o)

  114. That Bad Dog,

    You are right. Wilson is conveniently ignoring 1 Corin 7 which is clear and totally negates what Wilson is trying to make people believe. insidious.

  115. I have read some of the stuff about Wilson before. I have no idea why anyone in the thinking Christian community would want to be aligned, even slightly, with a guy who is trying to re-write the history of the Confederacy or Slavery. It is mind blowing.

    What next? Guys who start saying that the Nazis were not all that bad?

    The only possible hope I have is that Piper’s video is in 2009, and that by 2012 he has stopped inviting Wilson to be a speaker at his conferences.

    I am emailing a link to this post to my pastor right now.

  116. “What next? Guys who start saying that the Nazis were not all that bad?”

    Well, seeing as R. J. Rushdoony, the father of Reconstructionism, took pains in his book to try and downplay the Holocaust, who knows? (And make no mistake, Rushdoony IS involved. He’s always involved when the word “theonomy” shows up.)

    Another weird thing about Rushdoony is that he, too, is often called out as being racist. (He said something like Christianity needs generations of “selective breeding.”) I listened to an interview with his son and he said that his father was not racist, as he performed interracial marriages. (Clearly this IS a good thing.) But then he went on to say that the controversial things his father said about race were all based on the idea of being “unequally yoked.” Now I don’t know about anyone else, but what in the New Testament even HINTS at race having anything to do with being unequally yoked? The only way this would be a problem is if one of the parties was an unbeliever, in which case the question of race would be a moot point. So neither Rushdoony nor his son have satisfactorily explained his comments.

  117. @ Bad Dog and Anon 1:

    Yes, clearly, if Wilson had listened to Paul, he would never have been able to claim that sex was non-egalitarian. You’d also think the very phrase “one flesh” would speak against someone being “in charge” in that arena, too.

  118. Also, to whoever it was on here that said Doug Wilson was separate from Doug Phillips: from what I’ve seen so far, that seems to be true. Mostly. However, I am far from sure that there’s not some kind of lurking connection between those two. (And not just because they’re both named Doug, which seems to be the all-time most popular name for leaders in the patriarchal camp.) I continue to search diligently for said connection. I remained convinced that eventually, it will turn up and it will not be pretty. They are both too patriarchal, and have far too much money invested in Christian homeschooling for it not to be there. But that’s just my opinion.

  119. Boy, I just keep thinking of things to say. This is a little off-topic, but does anyone here know anything about the details of the falling-out between R. J. Rushdoony and his son-in-law Gary North (a fellow and extremely militant Reconstructionist)? I’ve heard it was extremely loud and extremely public, but what it was about seems to have been purged completely from the internet. I’ve heard that one of them thought the “blood of a virgin” – not sure if this is menstrual or happening on the wedding night – was a type of the blood of Christ (which yes, I know, is so out there that I would want it purged from the internet, too).

  120. He does address 1Cor 7:1-5. He just did not go into it in chapter 7. I just finished reading the entire book, even though I was advised by Wilson to not read it unless my husband specifically gave it to me to read. In the begining of the book he states it was written for men and their sons. I read it illegally. I repent. :-)

    He addresses the verses in chapter 12 if anyone wishes to read it. I posted the link to the online book above in one of my comments. He defines the authority each other has on the bottom of page 134-but I am confused and beyond caring what he could possibly mean.

  121. Anonymous said,

    “The only possible hope I have is that Piper’s video is in 2009, and that by 2012 he has stopped inviting Wilson to be a speaker at his conferences.”

    Anonymous,

    I’ve got some bad news…  Doug Wilson spoke at the 2012 Desiring God Pastors Conference.  The focus was “God, Manhood & Ministry: Building Men for the Body of Christ”.

    If the text of this video is correct, then 8,000 pastors were influenced by Doug Wilson, thanks to John Piper.  Reciting a Christian Creed at the Desiring God Pastors Conference

    Here are Doug Wilson, Crawford Loritts (employed by Campus Crusade), Darrin Patrick (Acts 29 church planter), and two others discussing Biblical Femininity

    Here are some of the presentations at the 2012 Desiring God Pastors Conference.

     

  122. Anonymous

    Read Deb’s comment. We mentioned in the post that Piper invited him this year. I’ll write more in a post later.

  123. Martin Romero,
    At the risk of boredom or taking us off the Wilson subject, here are my specifics from Packer and Piper:
    (Apologies to those who read these earlier in the week)

    These comments were in the very long comment thread on “”Complementarianism for Dummies” last Monday.
    Anon1 @ 4:26AM (Tues. 7/10) said:   
       “You have to READ INTO Genesis any kind of authority over before the fall. Which is exactly what they do. What is interesting is you don’t find this exeigesis very common until about the 1970′s.”
         Sometimes I try, with varying success, to guess the tiny seed-beginnings of things going horribly awry. (such as complementarianism)
         1973. Hugely influential “Knowing God” by J I Packer. Chapter 7 Thy Word is Truth: 
    “God speaks to the man and woman whom he has made. ‘God…said to them…’ (v.28).  Here is God addressing human beings directly. Thus fellowship between God and them is inaugurated.  Note the categories into which God’s utterances to them in the rest of the story fall.  God’s first word to Adam and Eve is a word of COMMAND, summoning them to fulfill humankind’s vocation of ruling the created order. (‘Be fruitful… And have dominion…’ v.28)”
    After this Packer adds the further categories of relationship between God’s word and his creatures, making it clear there are NO further categories: TESTIMONY, PROHIBITION, and PROMISE. 
    So what category does Packer leave out of Gen. 1:28, … substituting … ellipses…? ….
    BLESSING!  ”And God BLESSED them”
    He substitutes command and summons, making these the false focus of the whole male/female, be fruitful/multiply blessing. (Moses actually has God’s first command later in Gen. 2:16 just before the first prohibition, “And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat.” (Including the one of LIFE))
    IMO, From this little seed of omission (from a Bible verse, no less) and redirection to commands, summons, fulfilling vocational roles etc. has grown the whole complementarian house of cards. 

    “To pick on Dr Packer again, in his monumentally influential 1973 book, he changes Rom 5:5 “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts” to “THE KNOWLEDGE OF the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts.”
    To give Dr Piper equal time, in his most popular book, he paraphrases Eph 5:25 “as Christ also LED (Paul said loved) the church”.

    From Desiring God, Chapter 8, Marriage, 1983
    “Wives, seek your joy in the joy of your husband by affirming and honouring his God-ordained role as leader in your relationship. Husbands, seek your joy in the joy of your wife by accepting the responsibility to lead as Christ led the church and gave Himself for her.” 
    And:
    To understand the wife’s submission we need to understand the husband’s “headship,” because her submission is based on his headship. (“Wives be subject . . . for the husband is the head.”) What is the meaning of “head” in Ephesians 5:23?  (His answer is, primarily, “Leader”).
    And:
    Therefore when Paul says, “Wives, be subject to your husbands . . . for the husband is the head of the wife,” he means a wife should recognize and honor her husband’s greater responsibility to lead the home. She should be disposed to yield to her husband’s authority and should be inclined to follow his leadership.
    Notice anything odd about the scriptures quoted? This chapter has been greatly quoted and paraphrased by other authors and teachers in the following 29 years, so I think these omissions (…) significant.

    And then main theme of that book:
    “Unless a man be born again into a Christian Hedonist he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 55)
    IMO, Piper takes a word which is universally negative in the Bible, and which Jesus calls a word-choking thorn in Luke (hedonism) and makes it positive and synonymous with “Joy” by putting “Christian” in front. 

  124. @HUG: I think there’s something called 50 Shades of Virginity out there in the Christian world…..50 Shades of Grace was my spoof version, though if anyone cares to come up with the money I’ll write it. A book about a gorgeous man called Christian, who wants total submission from his woman surely has a large audience just waiting to part with their cash…

  125. @ Dave:

    I too have always found the whole concept of “Christian Hedonism” a little weird. By using that phrase, Piper is implying that pleasure and joy are the same thing, something that’s evidently not true and the Bible never even implies.

  126. I’m going to go back and read the comments, but this is the first article I’ve read on TWW that made me want to vomit. I give the moderators permission to edit what I’m about to say, but I’m hoping I can phrase this without coming stark staring unglued.

    I can’t help but think that Doug Wilson is approaching this from a position of white privilege. He’s never known what it’s like to be a minority or to be discriminated against as a matter of law and policy. He can say this *garbage* about how Southern slaves appreciated being slaves, but how would he know? He’s never been in a position to have been OWNED. I’ve read the words of people who were OWNED and who were sold and moved around at the whim of their masters and they didn’t like it at all. If Southern slavery was so righteous, then it makes no sense why the abolitionist movement and the Underground Railroad sprung up. Thing is, Southern slavery wasn’t righteous and it was a terrible evil that needed to be eradicated. What makes it worse, in my eyes, is that there were people in the 1800s who defended slavery (and later, Jim Crow) based on the Bible, and we still have people doing it.

    This hits awfully close to home to me. Under Jim Crow (aka Plessy v. Ferguson), which was the law of the land up until I was a child, I would have been classified as “Negro,” because of the “one drop” doctrine. Or would it have been American Indian? Who knows–but what I do know is that my ancestors (a) married across the racial lines and (b) went to extremes to cover up what they had done, including moving to different states.

    Getting back to Doug Wilson–I think the best way to approach this man would be to persistently offer to purchase him as a chattel slave whenever he shows up in public. When he declines, which he of course will do, point out that he would have this done for other people whom he doesn’t consider as privileged as he. What I’d really hope would happen is that those who should know better (aka the John Pipers of the Calvinista world) would give Doug Wilson the left foot of fellowship.

  127. So if a woman named Grace died, she could have one shade (ghost). So if she had multiple personality disorder (50 of them) she could have 50 shades, hence, 50 Shades of Grace could be a very interesting ghost story. BTW, think about that use of the word shade in the other book titles!!!!! And then about the number of people killed by the Puritans for example.

  128. The only possible hope I have is that Piper’s video is in 2009, and that by 2012 he has stopped inviting Wilson to be a speaker at his conferences.

    Anonymous 6:13 PM-

    I didn’t know about this year’s Desiring God conference, but following Jan’s lead upstream, I went to Amazon to have a look at Wilson’s books. I see Piper wrote the forward for Wilson’s latest book published in May this year. It’s called, Father Hunger: Why God Calls Men to Love and Lead Their Families

    http://www.amazon.com/Father-Hunger-Calls-Their-Families/dp/1595554769/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1342313703&sr=1-1&keywords=doug+wilson

    Things are looking grim.

  129. Southwestern Discomfort,

    You are totally right. Doug Wilson used to be on the fringe and thought of as eccentric and dictatorial. He is now being mainstreamed. We should all be alarmed and warn people as quickly as possible. He is being affirmed by Denny Burk at SBTS, too. The “Reformed” wing is embracing him. All of these men have great influence on the YRR in the SBC. Piper especially.

    Another thing all of us need to know about Wilson is that he welcomed with open arms RC Sproul, Jr, to CREC after he was excommunicated from the Presbyterians for tax number fraud and falsely excommunicating people who would not obey him.

  130. Having just read Half the Sky by Nicholas Kristof. (please read) It changed my understanding of who I am as a christian and who I am as an American. I realized I was caught up in Americanized Christanity as opposed to being a christian. I am just so sick over Wilson’s rape views. I just want to climb under the covers and not come out. I really admire all the very well written remarks that point out the evil of this view.

    I also want to address the homeschool stuff. I used Veritas Press to teach my daughter from 4 all the way through highschool. We are not reformed and I skipped or discussed it with my daughter. We also attended on of their seminars on homeschooling. They push Doug Wilson’s books and I am so sick at the thought that I spent hundreds of dollars supporting them.

  131. mykingdom

    Thanks for the book tip. Don’t feel bad. I supported Ed Young Jr’s church for several years. Have you seen his mansion and jet? We all have had our moments so welcome to the club.

  132. I read about Doug Wilson and I want to punch things. I read Jared C. Wilson defending one of the most misogynistic comments I’ve ever read, and I want to punch things. I hope and pray that these “men” will fall flat on their faces, and I pray that their voices will be silenced lest they reach anyone’s ears.

  133. Anonymous,

    I can assure you, we are learning together.  I haven’t investigated the 2012 Desiring God pastors conference at all, and the information I am now discovering is shocking.  I plan to feature some posts soon so we can all be aware of what I consider to be a dangerous trend.

  134. “I hope and pray that these “men” will fall flat on their faces, and I pray that their voices will be silenced lest they reach anyone’s ears.”

    Me too. But it is too late. Piper is a idol to so many YRR.

  135. I’m less concerned with Piper these days, even when he’s giving these nuts speaking opportunities at DG. I’m more concerned with a guy like Justin Taylor who is an editor for Crossway books and, simultaneously, a major blogger. Crossway has deals with Douglas Wilson and Jared C. Wilson (to name but a few of their in-house “theologians”). Two things happened over the weekend that should catch our attention:
    1) Taylor posted a random blog about D. Wilson’s views on Jesus and economic theory (completely out of nowhere unit you realize that Piper is clamoring about the man, so there’s some sort of collective effort to bolster his rep and get him there)

    2) Jared Wilson popped over to Taylor’s post and linked to his own blog containing the sick, disturbing quotes from D. Wilson.

    These guys are working hard to get Wilson out there before DG. They’re using the events at IU’s campus to make him some sort of martyr, completely ignoring his own role in inciting the crowd, and they’re going to cash in on it.

    On another note….did anyone else catch that DeYoung posted on his blog about having CJ speak? Comments were closed! Imagine that.

  136. I hate to play devil’s advocate on this one, but it seems that the vast majority of criticisms of Douglas Wilson are coming from second hand sources. “They said Wilson said this…” relies too much on an interpretation of his words. Here’s a bit of fact-checking for you:

    http://www.canonwired.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Back_Poster.jpg

    This quotes his actual words in Black & Tan.

    Also, he just did a presentation at a secular university on Christian sexuality. He received a lot of protest and practically a riot, mostly from the hard left, all objecting against things he never says. He presents what appears to me to be a very “soft comp” position, though I’m not much of an expert in navigating the subtle nuances of this debate. The video is worth watching over at:

    http://www.canonwired.com/bloomington/

  137. @Hester

    Gary North wrote an 86 page book on what happened with Rushdoony. It is still on the web, at his site. It just isn’t easily found with search engines.

    The short version is that a divorce-remarriage situation precipitated a change in Rushdoony’s ecclesiology that ended in him adopting an early version of what we know today as Patriarchy and placing himself beyond the bounds of any accountability (“same old story, same old song and dance, my friends”).

    It’s actually a good read, and Gary North annihilates the doctrine.

    Here’s the link: http://www.garynorth.com/freebooks/docs/pdf/baptized_patriarchalism.pdf

  138. “I hate to play devil’s advocate on this one, but it seems that the vast majority of criticisms of Douglas Wilson are coming from second hand sources.” – Miguel

    For the record, my comments came after reading Wilson’s actual words and the quotes I use are from his actual book. I cannot read the seventh chapter entitled “Rape” of Wilson’s book “Fidelity: What It Means To Be A One-Woman Man” and come away with anything close to ‘soft-comp’.

    I don’t care which side of the comp/egal debate you fall on, or even whether you are a Christian or not, this kind of teaching should be repugnant.

  139. Before I get eaten alive for my previous comment, I just want to clarify that I in no way endorse Wilson’s teaching on marriage, rape, or gender roles. I’ve encountered precious little of it. In fact, I read his book on worship and reformation and listened to his podcast for about a year and never heard him address those topics at all. He may not actually be the “soft-comp” I picked up in the video, but he is not a pro-slavery racist either. I’m constantly amazed by what people claim he said, not because I necessarily doubt them, but because I hadn’t picked any of that up despite my moderate level of exposure to his teaching. Maybe I’m just not that discerning, but gender roles have been even less than a peripheral interest for him in everything I’ve heard/read. His position may be patriarchy, but apart from hanging with the Piper crowd, I’ve personally never heard him go into it. I suppose I’m gonna have to either read his material on the subject (waste of time) or not defend him. But watch the videos at Bloomington if you get a chance, I thought it was outstanding for a variety of reasons, and it may help cut through the hype to his actual position on a few things.

  140. @ Jeannette Altes
    I meant to refer to the post, not necessarily the comments. I do note that many of you are linking to his actual text. I was mostly referring to his position on slavery and racism. 100% agreement that under no worldview/religious system is the justification of rape acceptable. If Wilson does indeed say this (will check links), then it is somewhat shocking that he is still in a pulpit anywhere, unless of course he made some public recantation and apology of which we are not aware.

    As for me, I’m a fence rider on these issues: egalitarian except for church office. Perhaps reading Wilson’s book will help me gain clarity in understanding the true nature of complementarian reasoning.

  141. “Crossway has deals with Douglas Wilson and Jared C. Wilson (to name but a few of their in-house “theologians”). Two things happened over the weekend that should catch our attention:”

    And what else does Crossway publish?

    The ESV.

    Mahaney, Piper, Mohler, Russ Moore, Nancy Leigh DeMoss, Mark Dever, Kevin DeYoung, Mark Driscoll, Ligon Duncan and many more. Anyone see why the ESV has been such a big deal and promoted as the “most literal translation” by these guys?

    Anyone seeing the RR tracks connecting?

  142. “Also, he just did a presentation at a secular university on Christian sexuality. He received a lot of protest and practically a riot, mostly from the hard left, all objecting against things he never says. He presents what appears to me to be a very “soft comp” position, though I’m not much of an expert in navigating the subtle nuances of this debate. The video is worth watching over at:”

    Oh my. I was reading Doug Wilson blog and mablog years back when blogging first started. He is anything but soft comp. He is patriarchal and bizarre. He was considered very fringe by most of Christendom until recently.

    Keep in mind CREC was practicing the stuff we are now seeing from SGM and Mars Hill years back. The shunning, the spiritual covering, heirarchy, etc. It is a high brow version of a shepherding cult.

    In fact, in certain spiritual abuse circles his views on slavery have been well known for years. This is not new.

    Doug Wilson loves the notority. Back when I read his blog a lot if he did not like something you said or thought you were disrespectful to him, he would demand the name of your pastor and phone number to have you disciplined. Very few women dared to comment on his blog back then who disagreed.

    Just another charlatan who is full of himself and puffed up.

  143. @ Miguel

    I appreciate your honesty.
    I would like to point out regarding the post itself that the entire post flows from a quote from Wilson’s pamphlet “Southern Slavery: As It Was”. The post quotes Wilson then presents what the authors and others have to say about that pamphlet. It is indeed based on what Wilson actually wrote.

  144. “He may not actually be the “soft-comp” I picked up in the video, but he is not a pro-slavery racist either.”

    Back in about 2006, he was considered part of the Kinist/Christian Reconstructionist crowd in his thinking on race, slavery and Christianity. The Kinist thing was a huge revelation to many in the blogging world back then. It was a shocker.

    BTW: I am making a prediction. More and more of the NC movement is moving toward reconstructionism. I am seeing the beginnings of it in subtle ways and I doubt I would have if I had not researched the movement back in 2005-2006 and talked to a lot of people who came out of the movement. The ‘thinking’ that accompanies it is being implemented in many YRR churches with it’s strict hierarchy.

  145. Jeannette, the article acknowledges that Wilson redid “Southern Slavery” and published it as “Black and Tan,” yet the problems the blog post quotes are from the former. Wilson intentionally distanced himself from the writing of his co-author with the former, which was the reason for the revision. If the problems with the former were truly Wilson’s ideas, they would be present in the latter. But as my first link shows, this is not the case. But shame one Wilson for not catching the problems on the first publication, and that’s giving him the benefit of the doubt.

  146. Miguel-

    I will admit that I have not read “Black and Tan” in its entirety, but I would like to point out that Wilson refers to Wilkins in the Appendix to this publication as “one of the most honorable and conscientious Christian gentlemen I have ever met, and it is a great privilege to be his friend – although I have to say our mutual friendship has gotten us both in trouble.” Page 119. He also apologizes not for the content of the previous publication but for failing to properly give credit to certain citations. I don’t see where he refutes his previous position.

  147. @ Bad Dog:

    Thank you so much! I’m staying up too late reading part of the book right now. Can’t read all of it tonight. Sadly it’s leaching Reconstructionism at every pore, but hey, it’s Gary North so that was to be expected. Still, he does make some good points in here that would make sense whether one was Reconstructionist or not. He’s also provided the answer to the “unequally yoked” question. Good for Mr. North for exposing his father-in-law for the racist he was. How could a man (Rushdoony) whose parents escaped the Armenian genocide be so racist? The poisonous fruit of racism was right in his own family history – had he chosen to see it there.

  148. Miguel

    Be very careful about Wilson. He is known for his ability to be a bit of chameleon and that is the game he played on the slavery stuff. Say it and then retreat. Well, sort or retreat. Where are the apologies for the horrible things he actually allowed said with his name on it. How about the guys he invited to the 2004 conference? And I will be getting into the lovely things he has aid on gender. Soft comp? How well do you know his history?

  149. Jeanette

    There is one reason, and one reason only that his “update” got written, it was the lack of citations that could have caused him some serious problems. He has not distanced himself from these folks at all. However, he might be like CJ Mahaney. To get in with the big dogs, he might suddenly stop saying some things like when Mahaney suddenly dropped the word “Head Apostle”  in front of his name.

  150. Miquel:

    I would like to echo Dee’s advice. And so you will know, I am conservative, hold the comp position, attend an elder led church, and am very pleased with the changes at Southern Seminary.

    I read recently (and I can’t remember where I read it, but was so impressed with it) that our critical faculties are at their weakest when someone is affirming the things that we believe.

    It is inexcusable for any professing Christian in 2012 to become in any way an apologist for slavery. Even flirting with that topic, in my opinion, is an immediately disqualifies one from Christian leadership.

    Can you imagine a Christian trying to “correct the record” or “give perspective to” or rehabilitate Naziism in Germany? If someone did that, they would, correctly, be marked as a kook and out of touch.

    So it is with slavery.

    I know that Wilson “gets the Gospel right.” (Piper’s words). I am glad for that – sort of. I am glad that he gets the Gospel right, but I hate that anyone who gets the Gospel right would get so wrong the natural implications of the Gospel.

    One can, I believe, extend grace to our ancestors of hundreds of years ago who may have held similar views. We also once believed in the Divine Right of Kings and other things we no longer believe in.

    But to hold a “not so bad” slavery view in 2012 shows a warped situation.

    I do not believe that many of the people listed in this post or the comments hold Wilson’s positions on slavery or call themselves “Paleo-Confederates”, as does Wilson. (Btw, can you imagine someone calling themselves a “Paleo-Nazi?”)

    But these men are showing extremely poor judgment. If this continues, they will not build a movement, but a ghetto.

    Isn’t it enough that Christians take positions by virtue of the Gospel that are completely contrary to all that the world stands for? We are already sufficiently counter-cultural.

    Do we also need to start adopting more strange ideas – ideas that are not the Gospel, and are actually antithetical to the Gospel? Is this loyalty to Jesus or are we diluting and distorting the Gospel by attaching things that are inappropriate?

    We have one guy in our church who is, frankly, a nut. He comes from a wonderful family. His mother is dear. His father was martyred on the mission field. But he is a nut. He has drunk deeply from the Wilson well, the Grant well and other places that cause him to believe some really strange things.

    He reminds me, at times, of the conservative Christian who shot the abortion doctor. That guy, too, “got the Gospel right,” but he shot and killed another human being.

  151. Thank you, Dee and Deb, for finally covering this in the way that you did. This information needs to be out there. I’ve heard some dismiss Wilson as “crazy” and others dismiss critique of him as slanderous – both are ways of avoiding serious discussion of these issues within the church as well as what I would call the profound failure of much homeschool and “Christian school” education.

  152. I did some additional reading on this issue. It just curls your hair how people can some how ‘justify’ acts like slavery, by almost hinting we abolished it in some unbiblical fashion. How they add things like 80% of the south didn’t own slaves, and of the 20% left? Only 5% owned the type of plantation that you see viewed in the media. How most were not mistreated as you have been taught. How the north were bigots as well. Can they seriously say that bigotry is biblical? Can’t we admit that is the reason slavery of this sort was acceptable in the first place?

    Where are the stories of the HUGE biblical outrage of that ‘small’ percentage of people that mistreated their slaves? Where is the preaching against the bigotry that wasn’t such a small percent? Is it biblical to view people of color as animals?

    What’s next are they going to justify concubines also? How they ‘legally’ still are a husband to one wife, since concubines aren’t considered ‘wives’ on certain levels?

    They can’t leave out the evils parts, and say they were ‘small’ in comparison when you clearly have unbiblical attitudes, outlooks, etc towards the black population overall at this time in history.

    I come from a southern family FULL of bigots, and my parents marched in the civil rights movement because it was just and the Christian thing to do. They raised us as ‘prejudice is ignorance’, and I still stand by it. Sadly, my parents were looked upon as ‘traitors’ even worse than the ‘blacks’ that were viewed as too uppity. (Yes, that is putting it nicely) Thankfully, they felt led to do it anyway.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y0fTaMBESs

    Wilson says ‘good riddance’ to slavery in the video, but states we are paying for unconstitutional, and unbiblical way of going about it today. Racism is till alive and well today sadly. I pray that my grandchildren’s generation will look at the civil rights period I lived through, and wonder ‘how could people think like that?” Just most people do today as we look at the evils of the past.

    We are suppose to learn from history – not justify it in some fashion.

    Sigh.

  153. “Its official!! They are ice skating in hell I never thought the day would come when I agree with someone who likes the changes in Southern Seminary!!”

    Eagle, Simmer down. Don’t start putting the skates on yet. You see, the YRR/Calvinista crowd stick together. You most likely will NOT see a culture warrior blog post on Mohler calling out Piper for promoting a kinist. They just pretend it is not happening. And, remember, Denny Burke, Dean of Boyce college at SBTS has had positive blog posts about Wilson.

    What these guys will tell you is that they agree with this atheist stuff and ignore the other. But what is really happening is young skulls will think “Wilson good” because our idols said nice things about them. And yes there is a place in Christendom for guilt by association when it comes from that stratosphere. It is a club. Piper is far too popular with SBTS students for them to really question him on his wisdom and discernment. And my guess is they really don’t think Wilson’s views are that wrong.

  154. How could a man (Rushdoony) whose parents escaped the Armenian genocide be so racist? The poisonous fruit of racism was right in his own family history – had he chosen to see it there.

    Simple. Is it US or THEM who’s running the ovens or the ones getting shoved into them?

    Dom & Sub, Top & Bottom. Always better to be the Master Race than the Subhuman, the one wearing the boot instead of the one who’s face is being stamped on. Because when something gets redefined in terms of POWER, those are the only two choices.

    (Note that both Mohammed & Calvin define God’s primary attribute as Omnipotent Will, i.e. Ultimate Power. Not much of a stretch from there to “God Is POWER”. And becoming Godly becomes “Let the face-stamping begin! God Wills It!”)

  155. “How could a man (Rushdoony) whose parents escaped the Armenian genocide be so racist? The poisonous fruit of racism was right in his own family history – had he chosen to see it there.

    Simple. Is it US or THEM who’s running the ovens or the ones getting shoved into them?

    HUG, This is so true. I was talking with a friend of mine who does massive research into abuse of all kinds and we were discussing victimology. Why is it when a girl is raped the first question people will want to know is, “What was she doing there”? Or “What was she wearing”? They do not even realize how much they are subconsciously blaming the victim. Why not ask, what was the perp doing there and what made him think he could get away with it?

    Except for those who walk with Christ and those who have been victimized, most people really despise victims. They fear them. And yes, it is fear whether they realize it or not. There is a whole psychology attached to it that is unbelievable. People talk a good commpassion game and mostly say, I will pray for you, but rarely are they just in action or stand up to the ones who do it. Most make excuses not to confront the evil or deal with it.

    So when the abuse is spiritual it adds another dimension to it. The people you gave your trust to abused you. Used you and the others who also gave their trust don’t want to admit how undiscerning they were. They make excuses for evil.

    I know you have probably studied the psychology of the Holocaust but one would think after a while the death and destruction of humans would get to those involved. But their hearts grew harder and because very few Jews fought back, it made it worse for them.

    i have a big soft spot in my heart for liberal Jews. As the Jews always pass down their history most understand suffering. That is why we must stand up for those who have been spiritually abused and say to the bullies and their fellow travellors: We are going after you.

  156. “Dee and Deb… Greetings from Denver. I’ m chilling in the airport, charging my Android against the well just reading theology. Almost to Montana!!

    On your next stop, tell us what you are reading. Inquiring minds want to know…

  157. Eagle

    Ah Montana- God’s country! I love it there. Plus, with the weather, this is the best time to go.

  158. So what’s next from Doug Wilson? Lynchings promoted racial harmony? Japanese American internment was really for the internees’ own good? The ideological backbone for the civil rights movement was Communism?

  159. To All Our Readers

    It appears that Jared Wilson at the Gospel Coalition is a might irritated about our unccharitable, “antiWilson” stand.(Funny, I thought we were just quoting other sources.) It appears that some perceptive readers chose to raise a few questions.

    He also claims that he knows nothing about Wilson’s views on slavery. I thought everyone had access to Google. TWW was also quoted as “not checking our facts” at another blog. Well, tune in tomorrow and we will give an update on this situation. Needless to say, we stand firm on what we have printed. 

  160. Dee,

    Jared wants hits to his site. His blog is relatively new on the TGC, so it only makes sense that he would make a post on Justin Taylor’s blog asking folks to stop by and read the drivel he posted from DW. It’s controversial, it blames egalitarianism for rape, and it ignores Wilson’s clear and transparent associations with white supremacy groups.

  161. Re Doug Wilson’s alleged kinism, I think I mentioned this on another post. From what I remember of reading stuff going on between him and “Little Geneva” (which was a kinist website as I recall), it ended up with Doug Wilson suggesting people avoid kinism. Read into that what you will, but I don’t think he was a card-carrying kinist at any time.

    I say this not to defend his stance on Southern slavery or sex, but because I believe in being fair to people. However it may be that I have the facts wrong or incomplete, in which case I welcome comment.

  162. “Jared wants hits to his site. His blog is relatively new on the TGC, so it only makes sense that he would make a post on Justin Taylor’s blog asking folks to stop by and read the drivel he posted from DW. It’s controversial, it blames egalitarianism for rape, and it ignores Wilson’s clear and transparent associations with white supremacy groups.”

    Exactly!!!

    Koyla, Are you familiar with Kinism? Read up on it. There is the “our own kind” piece to it but also heavy into a theocracy of sorts. Wilson was definitely on the fringes of it with his views on slavery and a theocracy of sorts.

    Listen, these guys would LOVE a state church. They will deny it but just read them for a long time and you will see it.

  163. Wow Dee! It takes the TWW ladies to ‘teach’ Jared about Wilson’s views which are available to anyone with a computer and internet. Amazing how that works.

  164. The problem with Jared Wilson is not just that he apparently doesn’t have any idea what Doug Wilson believes about many things, including his Federal Vision perversion of the Gospel, his Reconstructionism, medievalism, slavery, and on and on. Nor is the problem just that he didn’t bother to do even a modicum of research on who Doug Wilson is or what he believes before promoting him.

    The big, central problem is that the material he chose to post and continues to defend vigorously in the comment thread (and which the TGC editors are allowing to remain in place) is *itself* reprehensible.

    The fact that the website has the word Gospel plastered all over it doesn’t make the content good or true. The verbiage over there is like some kind of Christian Tourette’s (Gospel-driven, Gospel-Centered, Gospel Wakefulness, Gospel Coalition). Apparently if you use the word Gospel enough, and create lots of hyphenated words with it, it proves something.

  165. “The big, central problem is that the material he chose to post and continues to defend vigorously in the comment thread (and which the TGC editors are allowing to remain in place) is *itself* reprehensible.

    The fact that the website has the word Gospel plastered all over it doesn’t make the content good or true. The verbiage over there is like some kind of Christian Tourette’s (Gospel-driven, Gospel-Centered, Gospel Wakefulness, Gospel Coalition). Apparently if you use the word Gospel enough, and create lots of hyphenated words with it, it proves something.”

    Yes!!! Yes! to all of your comment. This is why I like coming here. People get it.

  166. I haven’t really researched into the kinist stuff yet, but these quotes from Rushdoony (whom the patriarchs, to a man, adore) don’t bode well in that department (thanks again, Bad Dog, for that Gary North book):

    “Moreover, if she is to be ‘a help meet as before him,’ a mirror, there must be a common cultural background. This militates against marriages across cultures and across races where there is no common culture or association possible.

    The new unit is a continuation of the old unit but an independent one; and there has to be a unity or else it is not a marriage. Thus, the attempt of many today to say there is nothing in the Bible against mixed marriages whether religiously or culturally is altogether unfounded.”

    “But Deuteronomy 22:10 not only forbids unequal religious yoking by inference, and as a case law, but also unequal yoking generally. … The burden of the law is thus against inter-religious, inter-racial, and inter-cultural marriages, in that they normally go against the very community which marriage is designed to establish.”

    “The white man has behind him centuries of Christian culture and the discipline and the selective breeding this faith requires. Although the white man may reject this faith and subject himself instead to the requirements of humanism, he is still a product of this Christian past. The Negro is a product of a radically different past, and his heredity has been governed by radically different considerations.”

    I want to see these quotes side by side with ones from KKK leaders. Now THAT could be an illuminating exercise.

  167. Hi Anon1, thanks for your comment. Yes, I do remember reading about kinism at about that time. The racial element always seemed to be at the forefront, but I noticed the idea of theocracy and “ordered liberty” creeping in as well. I agree that Wilson’s ideas resonated with them as far as slavery and theocracy went: however, I think it was the more or less overt racism (although they wouldn’t call it that!) of the kinists that ended up souring the relationship.

    The views on the execution or exile of homosexuals or adulterers suggest that Doug Wilson would like to see laws in place that he favours, although I’m not sure that amounts to full-blown theocracy à la Handmaid’s Tale.

    I agree with Bad Dog’s comment about everything being labelled with “Gospel” nowadays – it’s happening in some circles in the UK now, with “Gospel Partnerships”. The sad thing is that it is in danger of undermining the glorious word itself, which would be truly tragic. I hope I’m not speaking out of turn if I suggest that charismatics have had a similar problem with using the word “Spirit” (eg Spirit-led: it’s good to be led by the Spirit, but I’ve seen cases where I thought it was as much a person’s temperament leading them as the Holy Spirit).

  168. I haven’t been back to Jared’s blog and will not go back. But I do hope he will do some research about Wilson. We are all to be looking at fruit. We can even talk about it. My headship said so.

  169. Some of the kinists (their names escape me) consider Wilson an apostate to their cause and seem to reserve a lot of vitriol for him. Wilson doesn’t have to formally be a kinist (or ever have been a kinist) to espouse views I consider indefensible. The distancing between Wilson and kinists can be mutual and sincere and I don’t have to agree with either of them. I certainly have no incentive to agree with kinists seeing an inter-racial marriage is how I got here.

    For former MH members will know that Wilson’s books have been promoted a lot at MH, though Driscoll has said on several occasions he think Wilson is wrong about the Civil War. Despite this difference and differences regarding cessaionism/charismatic theology Wilson and Driscoll did a conference on masculinity a year or so ago. it’s possible the two bad boys in the Northwest are pragmatic enough to realize that what they share in their ideals for masculinity are enough to overcome their differences on the Civil War and charismatic practices.

  170. ScotT

    He posted on Taylors blog asking people to visit his blog? Interesting. I guess he only wants people who agree with him. That, of course, if the gospel way.

    He mentioned some people who came from ” a blog” which is antiWilson. That means us, of course. I guess we are now the Voldemort of blogs (the blog whose name must not be mentioned). This is a lesson in Calvinista language. If one does not agree with someone on a stand, that makes them anti-whatever. This is how authoritarian churches and those who love them handle things. If one disagrees with the pastor on an issue, one is now anti-pastor. That means one is anti-gospel because the pastor is pro-gospel. The two of us will fight this silliness tooth and nail.

  171. That Bad Dog

    The new “Gospel” adjective is used in the same way as “biblical.” This means they are on the Lord’s side and are therefore “elect” and the rest of us are not and most likely unregenerate and wicked to quote a pastor here in NC. It is dirty pool and we intend to continue to expose this. I wonder….should we change the name of our blog to The Gospel, Biblical and Indubitably Elected Wartburg Watch.

     

  172. The case that threw out miscegenation as an offense of law and allowed inter-racial marriage was not based on the rights of a black American to choose to marry a white, but on the right of a white person to choose to marry a black person! It was decided at a time when blacks were believed to have fewer rights than whites.

    That case was relatively recent, btw, in constitutional law terms.

  173. “This is a lesson in Calvinista language. If one does not agree with someone on a stand, that makes them anti-whatever. This is how authoritarian churches and those who love them handle things. If one disagrees with the pastor on an issue, one is now anti-pastor.”

    Hmmm. We could make up a Calvinista game. If you are….

    anti membership covenant then you are anti church discipline then you are anti elder rule then you are anti pastor and since pastor and elders are pro the aforementioned, then you are anti Gospel= not saved.

  174. 2) Since the commenters here cannot grasp the meaning of this excerpt, I am not prone to think their grasp of his views on slavery are very accurate anyway.

    I was totally thrown by this comment!

    In other words, I see something awesome here and if you don’t you are a dummie that can’t grasp what is in front of you.

    Sorry but if that is the best he can do in defending himself? It certainly shows a lot of immaturity on his part. You would hope that more mature gentleman would show him how to deal with disagreements. If not, his ‘immature’ authority may come back to haunt them.

    He sounds like a teenager. How old is he anyway?

  175. The Calvinistas seem to have latched on to Wilson for his patriarchy. They love that hierarchial stuff and Wilson is an expert at it. Does anyone remember Wilson’s interactions with Christopher Hitchens?

  176. “2) Since the commenters here cannot grasp the meaning of this excerpt, I am not prone to think their grasp of his views on slavery are very accurate anyway.”

    Hannah,

    Many of them from T4G, SBTS, SEBTS and TGC are like that. It is surreal trying to talk to them. It is like mass narcissism. They are like arrogant entitled petulant children who have no idea how they are perceived by others outside their bubble. It is a form of inbreeding. And they are entering churches in droves seeking authority over people. It is like there has been mass indoctrination. It is unbelievable. I have been reading them all week and it scares me to death.

  177. To all

    Whoops- it appears our name is no longer veboten. Jared has officially welcomed readers of this blog to his.

    For the record, TGC, we have never asked people to go to your blogs and comment. However, our bloggers are thoughtful individuals who actually check out links instead of robotically nodding along with whatever is posted. They actually have questions and because they are thoughtful they don’t take kindly to “blow off” answers such as “don’t be uncharitable.” Good night! Just answer the questions. That is what we do over here and we are merely “conquered women.” (That one is really going to sell in Peoria-they’ll be flocking in droves to your churches).

    Now, on occasion, I have commented over at TGC  under a pseudonym (nope-I won’t tell you) so I could get a straight answer out of said TGC bloggers without them thinking I was on some sort of vendetta.And think of it this way, since you have been begging for readers, our good readers have given them to you. Look at the number of comments! Zowie!

  178. Dee,

    Check out the comments under Justin Taylor’s post on Douglas Wilson (it’s the absolutely bizarre excerpt about Jesus and Keynesian economics – complete with a stock photo of Roman coinage!!!!)

  179. Hannah

    The problem with those in The Totally Gospel Coalition is this. They self talk. They praise each other, agree with each other, talk to each other, go to the same conferences, read the same books, etc. So they are not used to people disagreeing with them. They do not know how  to handle normal disagreement,  had they not been pastors, they would not have made it in the real world. It is actually very sad. They claim to be missional but they cannot communicate in a missional way. That quote by Wilson was ridiculous. Anyone in the real word understand that. They don’t. They are used to listening to the nonsense of Driscoll so Wilson is just “second verse, same as the first.”

  180. Anon 1

    The Calvinistas prefer to use the word “unregenerate” with the word “wicked” occasionally throw in for emphasis.

  181. I’m late to the party (busy weekend) and have just skim read through all the comments. Just a few thoughts:

    – How do those views on sex that were quoted differ from the most horrible forms of violent pornography? (I don’t want to jump too far ahead of the facts, but I know in Sydney a couple of our theological colleges have a huge problem with the number of their students caught up with porn — even using the college computers to view it. Said colleges are strongly Calvinist. I have no idea whether non-Calvinist colleges have the problem to the same degree, but it isn’t hard to draw psychological connections between authoritarianism, hardline comp teaching, distance between males and females, and turning to porn to fill the void. Not saying it’s so, just that it’s a possible pathway

    – @ Kolya: yes, in SydAng circles it’s all about Paul. At Moore you do 3 or 4 years of Greek, but Hebrew is downplayed. A certain in-group of older pastors (now being copied by the younger ones) go around everywhere with their Greek New Testaments, and are known to pull them out to read when the bible reading is given. As if you can understand Paul correctly if you take away the context of the rest of scripture! And yes, the ESV is now the only approved version (and I do not find it a good version to preach from — but that’s my problem!)

    – has anyone else read the novel ‘The Street Sweeper’? I am reading it at the moment, on my husband’s Kindle, at his recommendation. It implies some interesting parallels between the Holocaust and Civil Rights issues — prejudice is prejudice!

    – as a non-American, I’m hesitant to say much about the slavery issue, but something struck me as I was reading through. Not sure how much you guys know about South African apartheid — but it was backed and instituted almost 100% by Calvinists, in this case the Dutch Reformed Boers — and the Dutch reformed are not soft Calvinists! They really believed that putting the races in a hierarchy of colour was a reflection of God’s right order in the universe. are we seeing the same thing here? Sure looks like it to me! The same belief in paternalism seems to be there — so women are more childish than men, and need to be told what to do, and blacks are more childish than whites and need to be told what to do. So only the white male is fully adult and fully human?
    Lord have mercy on us all!!

  182. Dee -

    What would a nonbeliever think to read that quote? Jared is amazed that commentors are misinterpreting what Wilson wrote. If someone needs to read the whole book to understand the quote, then maybe it was not an appropriate quote to use to make a point a blog. Nope, instead everyone reading it is just incapable of understanding what Wilson is saying.

    Jared was not very welcoming and came across like an arrogant man. BTW – aren’t most people glad when a link is posted to their blog? Maybe Jared only likes when everyone agrees with what he wrote and gives him a pat on the back?

    He didn’t answer my questions and thought maybe I should read more scripture . . . because, of course, I must not read enough since I’m not in agreement with Doug Wilson . . . because Doug Wilson is the next best thing to chicken soup, or some such thing I guess.

  183. Lynne T-
    I had not drawn the connection between South African apartheid and Dutch Calvinism. Interesting. The more I read about what is going on in not just Reformed circles, but also Pentecostal and Charismatic circles (they have their own brand of shepherding, and authoritarianism, including but far from limited to, the New Apostolic Reformation with C. Peter Wagner & company), the more I want to distance myself from organized Christianity(TM).

  184. I am suspicious of Dutch Calvinism for two interconnected reasons.

    1) Cornelius Van Til, who helped plant the first seedlings of Reconstructionism (which I understand Rushdoony worked on from there), was a Dutch Calvinist.

    2) What prompted me to leave the Presbyterian (PCA) church I had been attending was the pastor inviting a Dutch Reconstructionist to share his pulpit. A five-minute Google search revealed that said Reconstructionist also implied that non-tithers must be lost.

  185. It confuses and disturbs me that the same YRRs who say racism is bad can’t see that the same arguments that were used to condone slavery are eerily similar used to the arguments (biblical and all) used to subjugate women (even in a very soft, practically egalitarian way). In a comment on an earlier post I suggested reading Plessy v. Ferguson (the case that initially established the separate but equal doctrine which was destroyed in Brown v. Board of Education) and switch every mention of race for gender and see how similar it sounds.

  186. “Jesus said to them, ‘The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who exercise authority over them call themselves Benefactors. But you are not to be like that. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves. For who is greater, the one who is at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who is at the table? But I am among you as one who serves.” (Luke 22:25-27)

    We’re supposed to be loving one another as He loves us, but how do we do that with brothers and sisters who lord it over us and consider us wicked? How can we be unified in Christ with folks who hold views that violate basic human dignity but which they claim are biblical? How can we be at peace with brethren who believe we aren’t true Christians because we disagree with them? I don’t have any answers, and this stuff has been making my head hurt all day. God, have mercy on us all.

  187. Eagle – the KKK has historically been rabidly anti-semitic… even though there were Jewish officials in the Confederacy. (Like Judah P. Benjamin.)

  188. I am reading an excellent book by Kevin Giles on the new eternal subordination of the son doctrine and its relation to the issue of gender. Thanks for sharing the article.

  189. Yes, Giles is writing some very good stuff. Sydney Anglicans (who seem to be teaching Eternal Subordination as orthodox doctrine) can’t stand him

  190. I first ran across it in a passage in The Shack and then in a YRR blog so I figured I’d better try to understand it as it sounded like some kind of neo-Arian heresy.

  191. What a warped view of Christianity! It doesn’t matter if you’re a racist, sexist douchebag – if you believe in penal substitutionary atonement, you’re getting the gospel right!

    To emulate the breathless tones of John Piper:
    “Doug Wilson…doesn’t…get…the gospel…right.”

  192. Lynne T,
    You’re right about apartheid. I remember my high school history teacher in the ’80s telling us that the verses in Genesis about the sons of Ham forever being cursed as ‘drawers of water and hewers of wood’ were used to justify the inferior position of Black people. The Dutch Reformed Church (or NG Kerk) was a heavy influence on life in SA. Much has changed since 1994 but bottle stores are still closed on Sundays, even in the New SA!

    An example of squashing out opposition that my mother told me from the late ’50s/early ’60s: church services were broadcast live on the radio on Sundays, each week a different congregation, until one day when the service was being broadcast from the Methodist church my mom and her family attended. During the sermon, the minister, Clifford Storey, was critical of apartheid and government policies and the service was quickly taken off air. Since then, all church services on the SABC were prerecorded for transmission at a later date.

  193. JJ,

    to be truthful, that’s what I get when I see the attitudes of some current ‘teachers of the law’: as long as what you say or write goes in line with what they consider ‘Kosher’, then you probably are not that bad.

    Maybe those in position of influence have been misled by those seeking approval and larger audiences, but I guess that in times like these, when information can be so easily accessed, there’s less excuse to not being properly informed before giving your public support to others, which somehow validate them and their ideas.

    If you’re in such position you should be very careful on who you support or reject. I saw the same kind of attitude some months ago when Rob Bell published “Love Wins”… Right after somebody wrote in his blog about the problems in *one* chapter of Bell’s book, not having read the whole thing, Piper twitted “Farewell Rob Bell”.

    Not saying if I agree or not with Bell’s ideas (haven’t read the book), but a person in the position of Piper should be able to slow down, look around, think, take his time, think again, and then be very careful on which words he uses. And then remember that there might be times when it’s not necessary to say anything at all.

    But, maybe, some simply don’t care on what they say, as long as it is ‘bold’ and sounds ‘biblical’. Some might even sympathise with the other guy’s ideas… Who knows.

  194. The Calvinistas and their ilk are not followers of Jesus but of Paul, so they should be called “Paulians” not “Christians”. They ignore the teachings of the Savior in favor of the teachings of the apostle as they have misinterpreted and misunderstood them. They also dodge the most direct statement on gender, race, etc. “In Christ, there is neither . . ..” In Christ, and therefore in the church, gender is irrelevant, race is irrelevant. So those who make them relevant are choosing to be NOT IN CHRIST, but in someone or thing other than Christ. May God have mercy on their souls and those of their followers.

  195. Dee @ Sun July 15 10:46 PM,

    Bingo. Words mean whatever the TGC guys say they mean.

    “‘Twas brillig, and the slithy toves

    Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:

    All mimsy were the borogoves,

    And the mome raths outgrabe.”

    These pastors are always explaining what something means “biblically.” Supposedly their job to communicate an idea, but for some reason, they can’t use the language everyone else uses to do it. They would never last outside the church. Not for a minute.

  196. My comment is stuck in moderation over at Jared Wilson’s blog while later ones have appeared … so I’ll post it here in case it goes “poof.”

    “Wilson connects that sort of masculine mandate to the mandate given to Adam to take dominion and subdue.”

    Jared, the mandate given to take dominion and subdue was not solely a “masculine” mandate (whatever that means), thus Doug Wilson’s connection is quite weak. It was a mandate given to both the man and the woman, and it did not involve dominion over other persons. Nowhere is the man commanded to take dominion over the woman. Gen 1:26 tells us “Then God said, ‘Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.’”

  197. As usual, interesting comments and observations :-)

    Re Cornelius van Til, although I don’t necessarily agree with his ideas, I had the impression that he disowned Rushdoony’s theonomic ideas later in life.

    Lynne T, interesting what you say about the distance between males and females in SydAng – could you elaborate? Do you mean both sexes keeping a physical/emotional distance from each other in everyday life? If so, I wouldn’t be surprised at pornography increasing as a result. A couple of ladies I know who visited certain countries where this was the cultural norm (albeit in an extreme form) said that they thought there was a lot more homosexual sex going on, albeit swept under the carpet, partly because the men could either not relate to or not have any meaningful friendship with women. I’m not saying that is the case here, but I fear that might be one of the outworkings in future.

    The doctrine of eternal subordination has also reared its head over here in the UK. To me it does look suspiciously like a halfway house to Arianism, if not the full-blown thing. An evangelical and Biblically-minded lady doing a lay reader’s course sent me a document she wrote which cited Giles and expressed the same suspicions.

  198. Estelle: “I remember my high school history teacher in the ’80s telling us that the verses in Genesis about the sons of Ham forever being cursed as ‘drawers of water and hewers of wood’ were used to justify the inferior position of Black people.”

    You know, Estelle, I heard a ‘biblical’ answer to that, for those who want to use that curse on Ham to justify oppression Black People.
    Understand that the man I heard if from was born back in 1913 in the South so this would set him up to be prejudiced and privileged.
    BUT! This man had an encounter with God and became a missionary in 1930 and he ran strong with this until his death in 1996.
    In spite of the time and place he was born, he overcame prejudice and held all people as important and preached the gospel on all continents (except Antarctica).
    He was aware of the passage concerning Noah and his sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth and did consider the reason Blacks were oppressed was because of that Curse.
    But here was his answer, and he taught this often in our Good Friday services.
    It was the Jews (descendants of Shem) who handed Jesus over to the Romans.
    It was the Romans (descendants of Japheth) who carried out the crucifiction.
    It was Simon of Cyrene (a descendant of Ham) who carried the Cross for Jesus.

    Along with this, he taught this verse:
    Galations: 12 However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, “ He who practices them shall live by them.” 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us—for it is written, “ Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”— 14 in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

    Therefore the curse of Ham is lifted in Christ.

    He also used the verse that every valley will be lifted up and every mountain will be laid low to demolish any notion that any one should think more highly of themselves than they ought.

    And so, in the world, the curses may still apply. But in church they have absolutely no place and those trying to make those curses apply are fighting against the Kingdom of Heaven.

    Note: I’m not saying that what this man taught is the end all of the curse of Ham business. But I am saying that I appreciate that he overcame his own prejudices and had a way to reconcile these things. Ways to reconcile them do exist in the Bible if people are willing to find them.

    The issue is that Doug Wilson is not interested in finding such things.
    He is only interested in making the Bible say what he wants it to say against Blacks and Women. Out of the abundance of his darkened heart, his mouth speaks.
    Doug Wilson needs to find the Light of Jesus and actually walk in it and to quit muddying up the waters with the darkness in his own heart.

  199. Bridget

    Today  I will talk about such things, inclduing the response to comments. You see, there is no possibility that he was wrong to use that asinine comment which he knew, deep down, was inflammatory. 

  200. Kolya,

    as a person living in England, but still relatively new to the “evangelical waters”, I would be interested in hearing more of what you say about all these Neo-Calvinist doctrines coming into the UK. I have heard quite a bit from the “big names” within that school of thought during the last few years so I am a bit familiar with them, and since I started reading this blog I have found myself checking more on what people say or what is taught from the pulpit.

  201. Martin

    Piper was trying to be cutesy but he cannot pull it off. Piper is totally opposed to Bell and a civil conversation is often not possible with idealogues.

  202. 56 Years

    I learned something very important about Paul from my current (definitely not a Calvinist pastor.He’s his own man). He said people often focus on Paul in a minute wasy without realizing that Paul had a very big agenda that is very helpful for us to understand Jesus. Paul rarely, if ever, mentioned the miracles of Jesus. His focus was on the Cross, forgiveness of sins and radical grace. He said that Paul helps us to understand the purpose and emphasis of Jesus’ ministry which was to point firmly to the need of the Cross and the only way to overcome this “body of death.” For Paul, it was radical and freeing and he travelled the world shouting the message.

    In my opinion, people have deep sixed Paul’s intent and made him into the new Pharisee who allows the Neo Cals to write the next Book of Rules which was not Paul’s intent. But, boy oh boy, is it ever their intent.

  203. Dana

    Awesome example. Today, you will see Doug Wilson “splainin hisself.” See if you hear the utter lack of something that I heard.

  204. Leila

    Great comment! Jared should post it. Is well written. Also, do not be dismayed about being in moderation. It usually means you have touched something and it is awkward. I think your comment might have done that.

  205. Kolya

    When I work up enough courage, I am going to wade into the homosexual wars. Not to be dismayed. I take an orthodox stand on the issue but I do not take a typical stand on the way we treat those who must deal with this in their lives and the dangerously naive churches who “intervene.” For example, I know of one church in which it was known to the pastors that a young man was gay. They told him to marry a young woman and went on the band wagon to get them together. It worked…..well, not really. The marriage took place, the woman was not told although the pastors knew and encouraged the marriage. The dvorce was rather quick, under 2 years, if I remember correctly. 

  206. Re dee on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 08:58 AM

    And they do not apply three things about Paul that are known: First, he was writing to specific church communities in response to letters or messages from them (or perhaps rumors or gossip?), and we do not have the content of those communications, which is important before extrapolating too far.

    Second, Paul may appear to contradict himself. One reason may be that Paul is arguing from something they said, showing it leads to a ridiculous conclusion, and then teaching his position. An example of both the first and the second is head covering. Paul, who said that circumcision is nothing, except possibly a denial of Christ, would not make covering one’s head a requirement for the faithful. However, he was writing to a culture where a woman without a head covering and long hair, was considered a prostitute and so could bring disrepute on the faith. So in that culture, it was important for women to have their head covered. But he also says that a woman should decide that on her own authority.

    Third, we know Paul was trained as a lawyer and used a type of argumentation that lawyers even today use — putting up a straw man, shooting it down and then presenting his side. (In Romans, he sets forth one straw argument, shoots it down with yet another straw argument, then gives his analysis. This argument is often studied by Christian law students and there is more than one book that explains it.) So proof-texting from the straw argument can result in faulty theology!!!

    It is much safer and easier to study the statements of Jesus in the Gospels, from which one can readily extrapolate a truly Gospel faith, and then assess and analyze Acts, the Epistles and Revelation from the perspective of that Gospel faith. Then really dig in and make understanding and interpretation of the non-Gospel books fit with what one gleans from the Gospel. To do otherwise is to deny the freedom we have as a result of the gift of Grace we have received from our Savior.

  207. Lynne T
    Thanks again for the Giles article link (1:08AM). I think it well-explains where Wilson is coming from — Giles’ number 2 alternative position (which Giles seems unaware of any contemporary Christians still holding). I’m not at all convinced Wilson is a racist– but rather an Authority-ist (a la Calvin) from which being a Slavery-ist and Patriarchy-ist the logical conclusion.

  208. 56 Years –

    I so agree with you on reading the four gospels and interpreting the letters through the words of Jesus. It is rarely done in the Calvinista world . . .

    One other example is when Paul is arguing against requiring Gentiles to be circumcised and a few verses later he’s having Timothy circumcised! On a first read it seems hypocritical and one thinks Paul is just nuts. But when you ask the question “why?” and read the passage a few times, you see a different process going on. Paul was also the man who wrote 1 Cor. 9:19-23 about being all things to all men . . . that some may be saved. It is the same reason I would completely change my dress and interaction with men and women if I felt called to go live in a Muslim country to share the Good News.

    Many pastors of the Calvinista crowd don’t seem to be able to communicate with other American Christians outside their reformed world, much less the lost in their own country. I don’t know what they are thinking. Many seem to be busy building their own little recreation parks. I pray that the eyes of their hearts will be opened.

  209. Dee @ 9:10 -

    I know of a woman who was married to a man for 8-10 years who was wondering when the time would be “right” for her and her husband to have children. She was being submissive and letting him lead. He finally admitted that he was homosexual and had no desire to have children.
    They divorced. She was devestated, had no idea she had married a homosexual, and had given 10-12 years to the man. It was not a good thing.

  210. “Second, Paul may appear to contradict himself. One reason may be that Paul is arguing from something they said, showing it leads to a ridiculous conclusion, and then teaching his position. An example of both the first and the second is head covering.” – 56 years

    Thanks for confirming! After extensive head scratching over 1 Cor. 11, I came to that conclusion without hearing it from another Christian – he quotes all the contradictory views of his congregation, and reply: Let them decide for themselves, we have no custom about this.

    What text in Romans are you referring to as the two straw men arguments?

  211. About the Ham thing, here is the racial argument as I heard it. (It’s terrible, I know, and I probably don’t even need to counter it with truth.) So THIS WILL NOT BE MY OPINION, BUT REPORTING ON WHAT I HEARD IN APARTHEID SOUTH AFRICA DECADES AGO:

    Adam’s name means red ground.
    That gives us a clue that Adam could blush, or be reddish.
    Blacks cannot be seen to blush, so Adam was white.
    Ham was cursed with a mark.
    That mark had to be a skin color.
    Ham became black.
    Ham’s descendants, blacks, have to be wood cutters and water carriers – menial laborers.

    (I can think of at least 5 logical arguments and more than one spiritual one against this, but it is probably superfluous.)

  212. I hate to bring David Barton into this, because I hate to bring David Barton into anything, but I just couldn’t resist the synchronicity of this review of an excerpt of his new “Founders’ Bible” in which he promotes the “Christian America” comments of pro-slavery South Carolina governor James Hammond. The reviewers detail with original sources Hammond’s views of race and slavery. If you want to know what Southern advocates of slavery thought about race pre-1865, this is your man.

    “In all social systems there must be a class to do the menial duties, to perform the drudgery of life. That is, a class requiring but a low order of intellect and but little skill. Its requisites are vigor, docility, fidelity. Such a class you must have, or you would not have that other class which leads progress, civilization, and refinement. It constitutes the very mud-sill of society and of political government; and you might as well attempt to build a house in the air, as to build either the one or the other, except on this mud-sill. Fortunately for the South, she found a race adapted to that purpose to her hand. A race inferior to her own, but eminently qualified in temper, in vigor, in docility, in capacity to stand the climate, to answer all her purposes. We use them for our purpose, and call them slaves….We do not think that whites should be slaves either by law or necessity. Our slaves are black, of another and inferior race. The status in which we have placed them is an elevation. They are elevated from the condition in which God first created them, by being made our slaves. None of that race on the whole face of the globe can be compared with the slaves of the South. They are happy, content, unaspiring, and utterly incapable, from intellectual weakness, ever to give us any trouble by their aspirations.”

    Read the complete review at http://wthrockmorton.com/2012/07/16/founders-bible-cites-pro-slavery-leader-as-proponent-of-america-as-a-christian-nation/

  213. Re an earlier comment about the white man and his Christian heritage, he may have a heritage now, but there was a time when he had none – Jesus and the original twelve apostles were all Jews. The Europeans did not begin to receive the Good News until Peter’s mission to Cornelius (Acts 10), by which time at least one black person (the Ethiopian in Acts 8) had also received the Good News. So the idea of the “Christian heritage” is a non-starter, really – every race that has had the Good News preached to it and responded has such a heritage.

    If however they mean the heritage of what is popularly called Christendom, then all I can say is that although it contained much good, there was also enough bad in it to spark off the Reformation, whose heirs these men also claim to be. Also Christendom was based in part upon mass conversions made by the decision of a ruler or at the point of a sword, and in some parts of the world (eg Germany, the Baltic nations) such conversions could be and were reversed by a subsequent political decision or mass revolt, showing their true depth.

  214. Retha on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 12:28 PM

    BTW, I have a cousin by that name, the youngest of a bunch with the initial R, from the land of tall pines and pink tomatoes.

    My challenge to you is to read through Romans with that in mind and see if you do not see it. There are some intermediate verses, but I think you will find it if you look. I will try to find my copy of the book and give you the citation for it, but it may still be packed from our last move, the third since law school.

  215. @ Bridget-

    “He didn’t answer my questions and thought maybe I should read more scripture . . . because, of course, I must not read enough since I’m not in agreement with Doug Wilson . . . because Doug Wilson is the next best thing to chicken soup, or some such thing I guess.”

    Jared did not care for a portion of my comment (EDIT) but I do hope he will take the time to research for himself what I wrote to him.

    Why were the commenters not “getting it”? It’s an awful quote, that’s why. Jared read the book. He had the grand view. We did not. Bad quote to place by itself with little to no commentary.

    Or–maybe we should just trust what Jared says…after all, Piper wants us to trust him when he says “Doug gets the gospel right”…You just have to know him…you just have to know him…yet he is ambiguous…all the time” as I wrote in a previous comment. What happens when one cannot “know” Doug? I do not know Doug. I will never meet him. What am I supposed to do?

  216. JJ–

    To emulate the breathless tones of John Piper:

    “Doug Wilson…doesn’t…get…the gospel…right.”

    And may I add…”You just have to know him…you just have to know him.”

  217. Yes, Giles is writing some very good stuff. Sydney Anglicans (who seem to be teaching Eternal Subordination as orthodox doctrine) can’t stand him”

    I have read both of Giles’ books and very much appreciate the stand he has taken and all the flak. He also showed where the Calvinists/ESS guys (Bruce Ware, for example) were taking quotes by early church fathers such as Anthanasius and editing them! I will NEVER trust scholarship out of SBTS again. EVER.

  218. “I’m not at all convinced Wilson is a racist– but rather an Authority-ist (a la Calvin) from which being a Slavery-ist and Patriarchy-ist the logical conclusion.”

    This is what I think, too. It is the “well ordered society” thing. Very Calvin. And we need smart men like Wilson and Calvin to lead us.

  219. “Thanks for confirming! After extensive head scratching over 1 Cor. 11, I came to that conclusion without hearing it from another Christian – he quotes all the contradictory views of his congregation, and reply: Let them decide for themselves, we have no custom about this”

    Exactly.

    1 Corinthians is a response to many questions. Some translations have quotations marks around a question here and there question Paul is answering. Problem is, he is answering a lot of questions! Which is why chpter 14 is so confusing compared to chapter 11. In chapter 11 we have women prophesying (about head coverings) and in chapter 14 they are not allowed to “speak”? Since there is no punctuation in Greek, the translators added based on their opinion. So how can they prophesy in chp 11 but not allowed to speak in chp 14?

    (By the way, the translators added “symbol of” in chp 11. A woman has “authority over her own head” and will also “judge the angels” see chapter 6)

    But we need to understand that chapter 14, Paul is responding to a question because the question is almost word for word what is taught the Mishna/Talmud about women not speaking in synagogue. The following should be quoted in chapter 14:

    34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

    35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

    Paul responds to this and the KJV, ironically, has the best translation:

    36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?

    The other thing that is interesting about 1 Corinthians, which is used by everyone to promote their pet doctrines (ESS, Patriarchy, etc) is that in the end, “Chloe has people”!!!! :o)

  220. Reading a letter, or Epistle, that is not addressed to you and may have been preceded by other letters or personal contact, is like listening to one side of a telephone conversation and thinking you know EXACTLY what the conversation is about. Add 2,000 years of time, language changes, culture, and translation (i.e., interpretation) into the mix and look out. We best be asking for the help of the Holy Spirit or else we are bound for a repeat of what Jesus came to set us free from. It is amazing that people still want to read the scripture like a legal rule book.

  221. “We best be asking for the help of the Holy Spirit or else we are bound for a repeat of what Jesus came to set us free from. It is amazing that people still want to read the scripture like a legal rule book.”

    Yes! And one reason why we must encourage people to read Jesus in the Gospels deeply so they can understand Paul!

  222. I’ve been offline for a few days and just got a chance to catch up – this Wilson guy is a racist. His views are just as bad as the KKK – he might as well wear a robe and hood when he “teaches” his vile racist BS from his bully pulpit.

    I noticed a few of the comments mention the Dutch calvinists, the mark, etc. For those that don’t know, the Dutch Calvinist where big time slave traders that made tons of money off selling slaves to the southern US. In fact, their views are what influenced apartheid. These folks are not a bunch of nice “Bible believing” Christians. They are racists.

    Sad to see the evangelical community buying into what Doug Wilson is selling.

    Dee, Deb thanks of exposing this racist.

  223. @Dee, It’s coming fast and furious these days, isn’t it?

    OT, but have you taken a look at the promotions for the upcoming VF conference on the “Biblical” doctrine of…food?

    After reading the initial prayer request and the subsequent press release, I decided there was no longer any point in trying to parody VF, because they have reached a level in which everything they do and say is already a kind of self-parodying performance art.

  224. Diane -

    Know Jesus :)

    This is part of the problem. Jared and Doug, among many others, want us to know them via quotes and books and high fives from their friends. Pastors sometimes push books from the pulpit more than they point to Jesus, Jesus’ very words, and scripture. When you read a book you are getting an interpretation (by the author, or quotes from other men) of what something means. Some of it is good, but I’m beginning to see that much is not good, especially if an author “verse picks” to prove their point.

    People need to be discipled and taught how to view scripture and how to study it – not be taught specifically what they should believe about it. The Holy Spirit can do a very good job of revealing truth to us and it has a much greater impact when God has worked it into your being. Many preachers are taking the place of the Holy Spirit in believers’ lives today, knowingly and unknowingly for both parties I fear.

  225. re: Dutch Calvinism and the slave trade

    There was a stream of principled, Bible-based opposition to slavery and the slave trade in Dutch Calvinism dating well back into the 1600′s, but sadly they did not win the day.

    This gives lie, btw, to the oft-stated argument that “this is just the way things were” or “everybody believed in it”. “Everybody” did not. You can read their arguments and judge for yourselves who was handling Scripture more soundly.

    An excellent article on this controversy can be found here: http://www.historycooperative.org/proceedings/seascapes/vink.html

  226. “This gives lie, btw, to the oft-stated argument that “this is just the way things were” or “everybody believed in it”. “Everybody” did not. You can read their arguments and judge for yourselves who was handling Scripture more soundly.”

    I DESPISE that argument. It is a copout and anti intellectual. It also disrespects those who gave their lives for truth like some AnaBaptists of the 1600′s.

    Would we use those same arguments to describe Driscoll?

  227. @ Bridget–

    Yes. :-)Know Jesus.

    I was more or less asking in a sarcastic way to show how beyond incredible Piper’s “you just gotta know him” statement is….as in–since you or I cannot know Doug Wilson like Piper does, then trust Piper. It is both incredibly arrogant (Piper has the hidden knowledge–trust in him) and dangerous (no need to worry our little heads about whether Wilson has the gospel or not–Piper knows that for us).

    I hope people take the time to slow down and think about what these professing Christian so called leaders are actually saying. That is what I am trying to do. A phrase like- you gotta know him -sounds so benign and funny; people laughed…but what is he saying? One cannot understand Wilson fully because one does not know him. (Btw–one cannot know Wilson even if one does “know” him because, according to Piper in the same video, Wilson is ambiguous- all the time…laugh laugh chuckle chuckle.) Craziness!

  228. “People need to be discipled and taught how to view scripture and how to study it – not be taught specifically what they should believe about it. The Holy Spirit can do a very good job of revealing truth to us and it has a much greater impact when God has worked it into your being. Many preachers are taking the place of the Holy Spirit in believers’ lives today, knowingly and unknowingly for both parties I fear.”

    Bridget this is exactly what they fear. Think about it, as you mature spiritually you need them less. What is a “pastor” anyway. It is not the same as “preacher” although it does entail teaching.

    It is all about controlling people. They want you feasting on their milk. As more and more people realize this, the more the institutional church built by man for man is going to have problems and become even more controlling.

  229. Diane -

    And after all the ha, ha and comments from Piper, Piper then asks people to trust Wilson (i.e., his gospel) and take him seriously because he is brilliant! Not much logic going on there. Piper isn’t even presenting a man with the character qualifications of an elder. Brilliance isn’t even one of the qualifications! Able to teach does not necessarily mean brilliance, and ambiguous is plain dangerous. But many in the Calvinista crowd are easily impressed by much learning.

  230. A couple of oddities worth noting with Doug Wilson:

    1. While he thinks that the South was right on the major Constitutional issues, he also says that the outcome of the Civil War was God’s judgement on the South (Black & Tan, 15).

    2. While Wilson doesn’t see the owning of slaves as a sin, he does think that trading in slaves should have been punishable by death (Black & Tan, 37).

    Wilson, and his fellow apologists, make a giant assumption where slavery is concerned. The mistake that Wilson and others make, however, is in assuming that the practice of slavery found in Scripture is identical with the practice of slavery as found in the South. As much as I admire James Henley Thronwell and John L. Girardeau as theologians, this was their fatal flaw as well.

    The deeper issue isn’t Wilson’s view of slaver (odious thought it is); the deeper issue is that John Piper is dead wrong – Douglas Wilson categorically does not get the gospel right. His views of covenant, baptism, election, and the distinction between law and gospel all fly in the face of Scripture!

    For John Piper to breathlessly exclaim that, “Doug Wilson gets the gospel right,” only shows just how ignorant he is of precisely what the Federal Vision theologians are teaching. To be perfectly honest, Dr. Piper should have kept his mouth shut on this topic, as he isn’t competent to speak on it.

  231. Reformed Rebel

    I am concerned that Piper has made some judgments recently that cause me to ponder his thought processes. Perhaps it is time for him to retire.

  232. 294 comments before I had a chance to look at Dee’s post.

    “Our problems today are a result of the South losing?” NO, our problems are SIN in human beings, everyone, including me.

    Galatians 3:28 comes to my mind: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

    I believe those who call themselves Christians, of any stripe, need a revelation to experience GRACE to get rid of all prejudices of any kind. As a result of this grace, there is no place for complementarianism (=prejudice against women), or slavery of any kind. In a new creature with a renewed mind (=the mind of Christ) this negative stuff does not exist. But the question is when do they get this mind?

  233. As I think I’ve said before, elsewhere in the comment thread on other posts, I think Dr. Piper suffers from “celebrity disease”, an affliction that makes some men think that simply because they are well known that they are automatically qualified to speak to any question they’re asked. It’s a dangerous affliction.

    Frankly, I’m unsurprised by Dr. Piper’s support for Wilson; they both deny that there was a covenant of works made with Adam. Piper, because of the influence of his mentor Dr. Daniel Fuller (cf. Daniel Fuller, The Unity of the Bible: Unfolding God’s Plan for Humanity [Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan, 1992), and Doug Wilson, because of the influence of Professor Norman Shephard (cf. Norman Shepherd, The Call of Grace: How the Covenant Illuminates Salvation and Evangelism [Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishers, 2000]). Dr. Piper’s introduction to Dr. Fuller’s work is illustrative of just how unorthodox this supposed paragon of “Reformed” orthodoxy really is.

    In both cases, a confused view of the covenants leads to some pretty wonky theology…

  234. Galatians 3:28 comes to my mind: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

    No racial prejudice (Greek v. Jew), no slavery, no gender bias, for the Christian. Not easily accomplished, but for those who choose to be “in Christ”, no justification for not trying and none for speaking for prejudice or bias.

  235. Beloved….

    David Barton is a fraud. That’s all you need to know about him ;-) There was a good discussion on Internet Monk about him last year. You might look it up.

  236. @ Kolya, in Australia, men and women mix together in the everyday workforce, just like they do in every Western country, I would imagine. They probably socialise together a little less, at least in the older generation — a cultural hangover from the mateship ethos of convict days. But in general, women were treated as reasonably valuable in society — Australia and New Zealand were the first 2 countries in the world to give women the vote.

    But something odd happens when you step into a conservative Calvinist complementarian church (at least in my experience) Suddenly, you look around at morning tea, and realise that women are talking to women and men are talking to men. The only exceptions may be where 2 married couples are standing together talking. As a woman, you find that men won’t talk to you about anything significant (like theology) because that’s ‘men’s business’, and women won’t talk about non-domestic issues because “I leave that to my husband”. They can say what they like about ‘equal but different’, in practice it just means different.

    And I do feel that this dislocation between men and women feeds into the porn culture, because normal healthy friendships teach you to see the opposite gender as whole people, not reduce them to a set of objectified body parts.

  237. Hmm…. thought it would be interesting to throw this into the mix….

    Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 1 of the U.S. Constitution:

    “The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.”

    The issue of slavery was a hot topic even in the drafting of the Constitution. This was the compromise they achieved. Note that it says Congress shall not prohibit importing slaves UNTIL 1808. That was the agreed upon time for slavery to end, giving the South time to adjust – although the tax ($10 per person) was meant to be a hefty deterrent….
    Thing is, when 1808 rolled around, the South just flat refused….then England attacked and the War of 1812 began…. after which a heated political battle over 40 years that culminated in the Civil War.

    How many heard that in their history classes? Slavery was an issue from the very beginning in this country. As That Bad Dog noted concerning Dutch Calvinists, not everyone thought it was okay and ‘just the way things were done.’

  238. Slavery was an intermittent hot topic for the best part of nearly two thousand years. The Church in the ancient world sought to reduce it (from my reading of that period of history), but it reared its ugly head again later and at the beginning of the modern period (about 16th C?) you find Catholics debating it, with pro-slavery advocates appealing to Aristotle and (as has been pointed out) the Calvinists taking their own approach to it (or some of them, as has been pointed out). The fact that England had a national church and was supposedly Christian didn’t prevent some of her sailors from participating in the slave trade – even John Newton took a while to get it right.

  239. Hi Lynne T, thanks for your remarks on the subject of gender relationships. Over the past 15 years I have noticed a similar phenomenon creeping in. I’m only talking about one church, to be fair, but my alarm bells went off when they started segregating the Bible study groups for the under 30s.

  240. Kolya – Unfortunately the early church did not try to reduce slavery, in fact a good chunk of the church supported it. Sadly the early church, and church in general until last several hundred years, viewed slavery as “normal”. Very sad, but true. It was not a hot topic until close to the time of civil war. Thankfully some parts of Christianity got its head straight and supported the north and the effort to end slavery. Sadly, some southern protestant denominations (Yes, SBC I am looking at you) supported slavery.

    I don’t believing in hiding history – if you do, you don’t learn.

  241. 56 years – Retha is a rather common name where I am from – Afrikaans speaking South Africans. If I could actually trace my geneology for 300 years (I can’t), some of my people will be from those Dutch Calvinists.

    Another topic I wonder about – if 1 Cor 11 is a collection of quotes from people whom Paul do not say he agrees with, should that influence how much weight :3 should have in gender discussions or ESS discussions?

  242. @Reformed Rebel: From my limited reading of Black and Tan (google books is a wonderful thing), he talks a lot about the trans-Atlantic slave trade while essentially ignoring the inter-American slave trade. The trans-Atlantic trade had been made largely irrelevant by the time it was banned because of the native population of slaves, if I remember correctly.

  243. Retha,
    You reminded me that some of my traceable ancestors were New England Puritans around 350 years back. They were in the Roxbury MA congregation of John Eliot, a man in some ways far ahead of his time. This from Wikipedia, “In 1689 John Eliot donated 75 acres (300,000 m2) of land in Jamaica Plain to support the Eliot School, founded in 1676. Under the donation, the school was required to accept both Negros and Indians without prejudice, a great exception for the time.[8] The school survives near its original location to this day as The Eliot School of Fine and Applied Arts.”
    He was known as Apostle to the Indians.

  244. @ Garland – it might have been “largely irrelevant” in the US, but in the Caribbean and Latin America (Cuba and Brazil, for example), it was anything but.

    Brazil was the very last country in the Western Hemisphere to abolish slavery – in 1888,. In fact, there are people in Brazil today (the Confederados) who are descended from Southerners who left the US for Brazil after the Civil war ended. Obviously, they wanted to live in a place where chattel slavery was still legal.

    Sadly, most of the documentation of the Brazilian slave trade (both with Africa and inside the country itself) has been lost – deliberately destroyed by officialdom when slavery was abolished there. Talk about revisionism!

  245. Eagle wrote “Many reformed have created a “reformed industrial complex.” Their career and livelihood is dependent on each other. That’s why they need Wilson, and why they will overlook his racism. The system needs him because its a house of cards.”

    You’ve just described “The Gospel Coalition” perfectly. It seems to be a self-promotion society – the website is constantly advertising books and conferences to the faithful. Combine that with their acceptance of Driscoll and Mahaney and it all looks remarkably similar to the pentecostal / charismatic / televangelist / prosperity gospel “industry”. OK, the corruption isn’t as extreme in conservative evangelicalism, but it still all-present.

  246. Ian, I agree it is a house of cards. They were early adapters of the internet and social media which helped them grow fast but it is also becoming their undoing because they cannot control it. Adn they are into control.

  247. Mara,
    Thank you for sharing your friend’s teaching about the lifting of Ham’s curse. Good points.

  248. @ Beloved:

    David Barton is a “historian” who promotes the idea that America was founded as a Christian nation and that the Founding Fathers were evangelical Christians. He’s done some pretty entertaining gymnastics to make his views appear credible. Warren Throckmorton has documented most of said gymnastics at his blog. You’ll find out all you need to know about him there.

    http://wthrockmorton.com/

  249. @Lynne T (6:52 pm) – Yes, that was my experience as well (gender segregated conversations in church: serious subjects for men; fluff for women). I can’t believe that is God’s plan for relationships between male and female image bearers and I agree with you that this sort of segregation facilitates objectification of the other sex.

  250. Kolya – Unfortunately the early church did not try to reduce slavery, in fact a good chunk of the church supported it. Sadly the early church, and church in general until last several hundred years, viewed slavery as “normal”. — Freedom

    Slavery WAS Normal up until the Industrial Revolution, when machines replaced “animate property” as capital investment for large-scale industry. A fish doesn’t know it’s wet. And when Slavery is what’s normal, “freedom” can easily come to mean “Now I Get To Be The Slaveowner”.

    Originally it wasn’t based on race, but on whose tribe lost a war with another.

    Now the African slave trade WAS based on race. Before the African slave trade got established, blacks were portrayed in Western art as “funny-looking foreigners”, emphasis on “foreign”. Yes, they were considered “not us”, but not much more than the white guys with the funny language the next kingdom over.

    That changed with the slave trade. After it got established, you started seeing “blacks are animals”, “Curse of Ham”, “God Willed It”, and everything else to justify it and salve consciences. (This was long before Darwin, but all Darwin did was change the justification for the racism already there.) If you weren’t enslaving people but taming and breaking animals to the plow, it was a lot easier.

  251. “EMSoliDeoGloria on Tue Jul 17, 2012 at 10:47 AM said:

    @Lynne T (6:52 pm) – Yes, that was my experience as well (gender segregated conversations in church: serious subjects for men; fluff for women). I can’t believe that is God’s plan for relationships between male and female image bearers and I agree with you that this sort of segregation facilitates objectification of the other sex.”

    Could not resist…(HT Jo @ Reformed Traveler.)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMb8Csll9Ws

  252. Hi, great article but you should do a wee spell check and change their in the penultimate paragraph. Take care.

  253. Andy

    In the last couple of weeks i have been doing an abysmal job of finding spelling errors, primarily in my comments since our spell check went off. Also there is a new spell check ofr our posts and we were behind on that one as well. *Sigh.* Thank you so much .

  254. @Diane — as a spoof that youtube is very funny, I just wish it weren’t so close to the truth. I really lived in something very close to that for nearly 20 years. Only after I left that church did I gain the God-given confidence to go to Bible College and get a degree in theology. It used to irk me so much hearing people get up in church and say things that were blatantly ill-thought-out, and get a pass just because they were men, whereas, being a woman, I had no voice at all, and the moment I ventured even the mildest opinion in private conversation, I was ridiculed for being an ‘unsubmissive woman”. It seems to me that if you have to make the ordinary guys be “spiritual leaders” then the only way that works is to keep the women uninformed. I have become a passionate advocate of the education of women as a counter to gender oppression — any kind of education that fosters critical thinking and an empowering sense of competence will do it.

  255. It seems to me that if you have to make the ordinary guys be “spiritual leaders” then the only way that works is to keep the women uninformed. — Lynne T

    Zero Sum Game, where the only way to push yourself up is to push someone else down. Find somebody (or some group/class of somebodies) you can keep down so you can be above them.

    “If I can’t be better than a N—-r, who can I be better than?”
    – some poor-white-trash Ku Kluxer of the 1950s; proud of being White because otherwise he was a complete loser.

    That’s the dynamic at work, and it’s ugly, and sure doesn’t sound like Jesus no matter how many coats of Christianese paint you give it.

  256. couldn’t agree more! I think that’s my biggest problem with all these guys — they want to grow their power by enslaving others, in the name of Jesus who came to be a servant and to set the captives free!

  257. “When we quarrel with the way the world is, we find that the world has ways of getting back at us. In other words, however we try, the sexual act cannot be made into an egalitarian pleasuring party. A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts. This is of course offensive to all egalitarians, and so our culture has rebelled against the concept of authority and submission in marriage. This means that we have sought to suppress the concepts of authority and submission as they relate to the marriage bed.” — Doug Wilson, Fidelity

    I read that one off to my roommate, too. His exact words:

    “THAT is a man who is HEAVILY into BDSM.”

    As for 50 Shades of Grey, he also wasn’t surprised to learn the author was really a British woman: “That’s been Britain’s National Sexual Kink for a long time.”

  258. Andy @ 4:28…Seriously? Not to pick a fight, because I’d surely loose. I’ve been referred to as ‘ignorant’ by past commenters. But requesting our pastor use spell check, and you, using the words “wee” and “penultimate”…ummm:-( Most often we use the first word as in “…all the way home.”; and I had to look up “penultimate”. But that’s just my 2 cents worth. Dee, and Deb, I’ve prayed for you pretty much the entire day. So as you begin your Wednesday, I hope it’s filled with joy and peace.

  259. jack,

    While I appreciate your prayers, I have to confess that Andy provided quite a laugh for me. :-)

    We are merely volunteers, not professional journalists.

  260. Lynne T:

    “…I have become a passionate advocate of the education of women as a counter to gender oppression….”

    Amen! Spend a little less time in the kitchen (like Martha) and more at the feet of Jesus (like Mary). That’s the “good thing” according to Jesus and this will not be taken away from us.

  261. jack

    Actually what is really going on behind the scenes is amusing and may explain my massive numbers of spelling errors these past few weeks. I type fast,really fast, (too fast for my skill level)and I have always relied on those little red lines to let me know when something is wrong. So:

    1. Our new working blog does not do this. I didn’t realize it. One has to actually go up and press a spelll check button.I found that last week.

    2. Our special editor’s comment area, for some reason, eliminated the spell check altogether. I only discovered that this weekend and GBTC is trying to find a fix.

    3. My confounded I Pad and I Phone believe they know what I want to say and changes it for me.

    4.Add in the typical mistakes  when you are in a hurry (“their” for “there”, etc) and you have the perfect storm.

    In fact, GBTC said to me this weekend,” Do you realize you are making a lot spelling errors?” One of our long time readers also sent me an email as well.

    So, suddenly, I realized I needed to go back to old fashioned, careful, proof reading which adds an incredible amount of time to each post. There you have it. The travails of a blogger outlined in all its tedium.

    Secondly, thanks for your prayers. I will need it for today’s post. This one is a jaw dropping doozy.

  262. “I realized I needed to go back to old fashioned, careful, proof reading”

    You can always copy and paste to another program like email or notes and let the spell checker there do the work. A bit clumsy but easier than trying to proof it yourself.

  263. ” he also wasn’t surprised to learn the author was really a British woman”

    LOL

    Maybe you can balance his view of British women by mentioning that there are a few at TWW who see things differently, including me.

  264. And most word processors also have a grammar checker. Yours is not the worst grammar I see on blogs, including this one, but everyone would benefit from a good grammar checker.

  265. On the Calvin as tyrant meme it’s simply not historically sustainable. He was a pre-modern fellow with considerable influence in Geneva, in his second tenure, but “tyrant”? No, not by sixteenth-century standards. If we’re going to be anachronistic then every pre-modern influential person, including Luther, fails the test but it’s not a very good test.

    On Wilson, he’s been subject to considerable criticism from the confessional Reformed churches and institutions for his role in promoting the self-described Federal Vision movement. He’s received less criticism about his plagiarized volume on slavery simply because, in my experience, most aren’t aware of it.

    Most of the recent enthusiasm about Wilson comes from the self-described “Young, Restless, and Reformed” movement which is mostly Baptist(ic) evangelicals with little or no connection to historic Reformed theology, piety, and practice. They like his stance as a culture warrior and apologist contra the new atheism.

    The confessional Reformed churches, however, have been quite critical of Wilson’s revisions of Reformed theology and every one I know, with whom I’ve spoken about the book on slavery is appalled by it. The Nashville Presbytery (FEb 2012) adopted a resolution on racial reconciliation which concludes by saying,

    We therefore confess our covenantal involvement in these national sins. As a people, both we and our fathers, have failed to keep the commandments, the statutes, and the laws our God has commanded. We therefore publicly repent of our pride, our complacency, and our complicity. Furthermore, we seek the forgiveness of our brothers and sisters for the reticence of our hearts which has constrained us from acting swiftly in this matter.

    That statement is rather more representative of the contemporary Reformed confessional ethos than Wilson’s view of slavery.

  266. Wow. I can’t believe R. Scott Clark just posted here. That’s insane.

    Mr. Clark, while I agree that the “Calvin as tyrant”-meme is often grossly overstated, I think there is a corresponding error which also doesn’t hold water, which I summarize as the “everybody was doing it so there’s nothing to see here let’s all move along”-meme.

    For example, I posted a source above that showed a strong thread of principled opposition to slavery within Dutch Calvinism from the the 1600′s. Otoh, it pleases me greatly that there were confessional Calvinists testifying on this matter. Otoh, it also annuls the legitimacy of the idea that Dutch Calvinists can – as a group – be excused for their defense of slavery and the trade because “everybody believed in it.” As I said above, “everybody” did not.

    The same is true in some measure for Calvin. No doubt Calvin was a man of the times (and certainly some allowance must be made), and concepts of religious liberty were in their infancy, but the fact is, they existed (and not just among Anabaptists), and the arguments both exegetical and societal, have changed very little from then to now. Calvin knew these arguments and rejected them. A century later the Puritan colonists knew them as well, and also rejected them, which is why we have Rhode Island.

    Calvin was clearly able and willing to adopt views hostile to the world around him, and even views that placed him in personal danger. It seems unreasonable then to say that he was simply incapable of seeing his way clear to religious liberty because he was from the 16th century. I think he would have disagreed sharply. He had considered the arguments for religious liberty and rejected them, just as he had considered the arguments for the mass, or priestcraft.

    I do think that we need to be accurate in stating what Calvin (or anyone for that matter) did or didn’t believe or do, but I have never seen what real advantage was to be gained for the Reformed cause by trying to downplay these things. (Zwingli, in particular, has some quite horrible stains on his record). In fact, I think it often does more harm than good.

  267. Pingback: More on the Bad News Boors of the Gospel Coalition and Doug Wilson’s demented views on slavery

  268. Pingback: Douglas Wilson on Slavery: The Evangelical White Man’s Burden « anthonybsusan UNITED STATES

  269. Pingback: Doug Wilson, Jared Wilson, The Gospel Coalition, and the Logical Conclusions of Complementarianism | SallieBorrink.com

  270. Nicholas

    Glad to see it being discussed. I think I may have found a new name for our list-”church gossip. ” I always thought of us as the People Magazine of the Evangelical Set. 

  271. I read the posts and responses. Seems like all the criticisms of Bradley can be boiled down to the fact they come from people who don’t think exactly the same as Doug Wilson (well no duh the criticisms are from people who disagree, that’s the very definition OF criticism), and some of them are from people who – gasp – AREN’T CHRISTIAN!!! Because of course, no non-Christian has ever been right in anything or had any opinion of worth ever.

  272. Pingback: Doug Wilson and the Neo-Reformed | Ben Irwin UNITED STATES

  273. Pingback: Slavery and the folly of biblical literalism | Ben Irwin UNITED STATES