Nothing To See Here

Just throwing down some random thoughts...

In all honesty, I don't know much about this guy or his church even though it's only a half hour north of where I am. I did agree with some of his congregants during the panicdemic when they were opposing the heavy handed approach of the mayor of "Mask-ow" who directed the chief of police to have them arrested for demonstrating against city ordinances which were eventually dismantled by the governor. Other than that, I know little of them. Even before their rise in the political discourse of the region, I was never led to fellowship with them.

While I'll tend to agree with him more than I would the local progressive atmosphere, he holds some philosophical positions, both theologically and civilly that I'm not on board with. Not that I would rise in opposition to him, but I'm not interested in beating the same drum he does. Again, I have never been able to put my finger on it but I'm not comfortable being considered a follower of him. The majority of those with whom I associate are of similar mind.

Being that Moscow is a university town, it is a blue gem in an otherwise red state. As one would expect, the area newspaper runs only articles which are critical of him. Honestly, he now seems to be riding the wave of populism that has erupted in the wake of Charlie Kirk's assassination and the national media is eating it up which is exactly what has been happening on a local level for the past 20 years or so.

So what's my conclusion?

If someone around here wants to take this fella and post his face on any movement besides his own personal agenda, they're trying to put a wet stamp on a fish.

Also remember: A light that shines bright tends to attract a lot of different kinds of bugs.
 
Last edited:
From the cited Wall Street Journal article: "Wilson believes the basic unit of democracy should be the household: Each household gets a vote, with the husband and father controlling the ballot." According to Doug Wilson's policy of household voting, only the husband should vote - women should vote only if they are the head of household (that is, if there is no husband to cast the vote on behalf of the household).

I have no information as to what extent this nutty policy is obeyed by members of the churches in Wilson's CREC denomination. This policy, if obeyed only by Christian women and families, would dramatically reduce the voting strength and power of the Christian Right movement, which would seem to reduce the effectiveness of Wilson's Christian Nationalist agenda.

Doug Wilson and the churches who follow him are known for their tight control of their adherents - I have some first-hand knowledge of this, having met a member of one of his CREC churches in Carbondale, Illinois. Christians who believe they need to be bossed and kicked around by an abusive, authoritarian, dictatorial preacher should seek out a CREC church - others should stay away. Anybody who seriously believes that he needs a pastor who thinks he has the right to tell him who in his family does or does not have the right to vote - well, go for it, Doug Wilson and CREC may be just what he is looking for.
 
Last edited:
illinoisguy said:
From the cited Wall Street Journal article: "Wilson believes the basic unit of democracy should be the household: Each household gets a vote, with the husband and father controlling the ballot." According to Doug Wilson's policy of household voting, only the husband should vote - women should vote only if they are the head of household (that is, if there is no husband to cast the vote on behalf of the household).

I have no information as to what extent this nutty policy is obeyed by members of the churches in Wilson's CREC denomination. This policy, if obeyed only by Christian women and families, would dramatically reduce the voting strength and power of the Christian Right movement, which would seem to reduce the effectiveness of Wilson's Christian Nationalist agenda.

Doug Wilson and the churches who follow him are known for their tight control of their adherents - I have some first-hand knowledge of this, having met a member of one of his CREC churches in Carbondale, Illinois. Christians who believe they need to be bossed and kicked around by an abusive, authoritarian, dictatorial preacher should seek out a CREC church - others should stay away. Anybody who seriously believes that he needs a pastor who thinks he has the right to tell him who in his family does or does not have the right to vote - well, go for it, Doug Wilson and CREC may be just what he is looking for.
Click to expand...
Very informative... Though I have never been able to articulate my reservations about this guy, what you post goes with what my gut has been telling me about him for years.

I double down on what I said previously: any attempt to affix his face or name to any movement aside from his own personal agenda is merely attempting to put a wet stamp on a fish. But that's never stopped the liberal media, whether locally or nationally from trying.
 
abcaines said:
Any attempt to affix his face or name to any movement aside from his own personal agenda is merely attempting to put a wet stamp on a fish.
Click to expand...

It is in the nature of liberals that they are going to try to smear and discredit all of us who are evangelical Christians, by falsely associating us with Doug Wilson. And that's wrong. And they are going to try to use Pete Hegseth's affiliation with Doug Wilson and CREC to make all conservatives look bad.

Having said that, there are a lot of Christians who have nothing to do with CREC or with Doug's brand of questionable Reformed theology, and yet find Doug's general ministry approach to be attractive, and are lining up with Doug. I stopped donating to Illinois Family Institute and American Vision after I found out they were promoting Doug. The sad reality is that Doug is quite popular with a certain segment of evangelical Christianity. The rest of us will have to decide for ourselves, as to what extent we want to try to disassociate ourselves not only from Doug but from his entire arrogant and extreme approach to ministry and political involvement.
 
subllibrm said:
Click to expand...
George Washington who was not an orthodox Christian, but the father of our country said this, “Direct my thoughts, words, and work. Wash away my sins in the immaculate Blood of the Lamb, and purge my heart by Thy Holy Spirit...Daily frame me more and more into thy likeness of Thy Son Jesus Christ.” George Washington, in his prayer book

The founding fathers and vast majority of our Presidents were never orthodox in terms of Christianity but all acknowledged that our country was founded on the principles of the Bible. Does that make them “Christian Nationalists?”

Daniel Webster (1782-1852) – “If we abide by the principles taught in the Bible, our country will go on prospering and to prosper, but if we and our posterity neglect its instructions and authority, no man can tell how sudden a catastrophe may overwhelm us and bury all our glory in profound obscurity….If the power of the gospel is not felt throughout the length and breadth of this land, anarchy and misrule, degradation and misery, corruption and darkness will reign without mitigation or end.”

The Bible and Christianity has been taught in our school systems from the very founding of our country. I’m not that old relatively speaking, but I remember going to school in the region I lived where the entire student body would go to the gymnasium and sing hymns and later in the classrooms we would have prayer and Bible reading. Jesus Christ was revered in the public forum and no politician would dare blaspheme God in public. God has blessed our nation beyond words compared to other nations, and even though we were regarded as a “Christian nation” there was also wide respect for freedom to those who did not acknowledge Christ and the Bible.

All this changed overnight in 1962 and 1963 when the Supreme Court banned Bible reading and prayer in our public schools. It was the first time in the history of the United States that any branch of the federal government took a stand, censoring religious activities in our educational system. A few years later, in 1980 the Supreme Court finished up their godless ruling with removing the Ten Commandments from our schools. What was the reason for this? “If the posted copies of the Ten Commandments are to have any effect at all, it will be to induce the school children to read, meditate upon, perhaps to venerate and obey the Commandments...this...is not a permissible state objective under the establishment.” Stone v. Graham, 1980

We have replaced the Ten Commandments in our schools with character traits having no foundation for what is right and wrong. The results are anarchy in our schools and society because there is no fear of God as there once was. Douglas Wilson is an extreme Covenant theologian who believes we can have a Christian kingdom on earth without Jesus Christ. Donald Trump by his own testimony is not a Christian by what the scriptures teach but he acknowledges Jesus Christ and the Bible and I am thankful for that.
 
Last edited:
illinoisguy said:
It is in the nature of liberals that they are going to try to smear and discredit all of us who are evangelical Christians, by falsely associating us with Doug Wilson. And that's wrong. And they are going to try to use Pete Hegseth's affiliation with Doug Wilson and CREC to make all conservatives look bad.

Having said that, there are a lot of Christians who have nothing to do with CREC or with Doug's brand of questionable Reformed theology, and yet find Doug's general ministry approach to be attractive, and are lining up with Doug. I stopped donating to Illinois Family Institute and American Vision after I found out they were promoting Doug. The sad reality is that Doug is quite popular with a certain segment of evangelical Christianity. The rest of us will have to decide for ourselves, as to what extent we want to try to disassociate ourselves not only from Doug but from his entire arrogant and extreme approach to ministry and political involvement.
Click to expand...
I was completely unaware of Hegseth's affiliation with Wilson. Actually I wasn't completely aware of Wilson's philosophy until you spelled it out. I just knew there was a vibe I didn't want any part of.

Given what you have posted about Wilson and his organization, it makes complete sense that Hegseth would carry his leadership philosophy into military doctrine. And you know what? I find Hegeth's approach to be appropriate for the Military. Alignment with Wilson is not a prerequisite such. But neither is Hegseth's approach to the military appropriate for other facets of society, especially family and political issues.
 
He's aPresbyterian, Post-Millenial. I've heard him speak. He is gospel oriented, but yes they have that weird household voter thing. And the Authoritarian way of handling stuff is not rampant among them. I know a lot of people who liste to him. They do drink bourbon and smoke cigars.
 
For those who want to research Doug Wilson's beliefs, here are some resources:

Kent Brandenburg notes Wilson's connection with "Federal Vision:"

This post explores a Wilson quote, "I am not a separatist."

This post explores a recent quote by Douglas Wilson, "I am not a separatist." Are people who believe and practice the Bible, "separatists"? This will answer.
kentbrandenburg.com

Doug says he still believes in Federal Vision, which has been branded by Presbyterians as a heretical belief in justification by works:

dougwilsonsays.com

Doug Wilson Says ‘I Have Decided’ to ‘Discontinue Identifying Myself’ with ‘Federal Vision,’ but I Still ‘Affirm Everything I Signed Off on in the Federal Vision Statement’

“I have decided, after mulling over it for some years now, to discontinue identifying myself with what has come to be called the federal vision....This statement represents a change in what I will call what I believe. It does not represent any substantial shift or sea change in the content of...
dougwilsonsays.com dougwilsonsays.com

Is Federal Vision really that bad? See this, from a Reformed preacher:

The Trinity Foundation - Federal Vision*

Editors Note: This essay is reprinted from the November 2005 issue of The Protestant Reformed Theological Journal. The Federal Vision, Steve Wilkins and Duane Garner, editors. Monroe, Louisiana: Athanasius
www.trinityfoundation.org

"Written by several of the leading proponents of the heresy now solidly entrenched in most of the reputedly conservative Presbyterian and Reformed churches, and spreading, The Federal Vision brazenly defends justification by works; universal covenant grace to every child of believing parents, if not to every person sprinkled with water in the name of the triune God; an election unto grace that fails to save; baptismal regeneration; and the falling away of many who were once united to Christ. Among the authors are Steve Wilkins, John Barach, Rich Lusk, Peter J. Leithart, Steve Schlissel, James Jordan, and Douglas Wilson."

This article reports on favorable comments on Wilson from Tucker Carlson and Charlie Kirk:

religionnews.com

The second coming of Doug Wilson

(RNS) — Conservatives are elevating long-controversial Idaho pastor Doug Wilson, framing him as a champion of a relatively moderate form of Christian nationalism — but critics say his ideas remain extreme.
religionnews.com religionnews.com

Kevin DeYoung criticized Wilson's harsh language and his "Moscow Mood:"

On Culture War, Doug Wilson, and the Moscow Mood | Clearly Reformed

“So, what do you think about Doug Wilson?” is a question I’ve been asked many times during my years in pastoral ministry.
clearlyreformed.org clearlyreformed.org
 
John MacArthur denied the Eternal Sonship of Christ for many years until 1999 when he finally recanted that position. Billy Graham made a very heretical statement on national television in an interview with Robert Schuller in 1997 agreeing with the idea that people around the world who practiced other religions could possibly be saved. That is the only time in his life he proposed such a thing as far as I know. I’m sure you can find other examples of good men who believed the Bible and yet may have erred on a particular doctrine or said things they would later regret.

I appreciate the light that is being shown on a form of “Christian Nationalism” and the dangers of it. Of course I disagree with Doug Wilson and anyone else who believes we are trying to bring in a Christian Kingdom on earth because Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world" (John 18:36). I have never heard Charley Kirk speak publicly on this Federal Vision group but if he had lived long enough I’m sure he would have had to address it eventually.

The videos I have watched with him interacting with college students he didn’t advocate the radical idea of man bringing in the kingdom that will bring world peace and prosperity by converting the world through the gospel. The book of Revelation is a book of prophecy (Rev 1:3), not past events that took place in 70 A.D. In Revelation 11:15 with the blowing of the 7th trumpet the Bible declares that the kingdoms of this world will become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ. In Revelation 20 John states that Jesus Christ will reign on this earth for a thousand years and bring in a world where “the The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the young goat, and the calf and the lion and the fattened calf together; and a little child shall lead them. The cow and the bear shall graze; their young shall lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. The nursing child shall play over the hole of the cobra, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the adder's den” (Isaiah 11:6-8). This is not a world where Christian Nationalism will bring this about.

The thing I reject is the absurd idea that anyone who publicly supported and voted for Donald Trump as opposed to Joe Biden or Kamala Harris is a “Christian Nationalist” that wishes to bring in a theocracy. Every Christian I know personally accepted the election of Joe Biden in 2020 even though most believed it was rigged. They believed it was the sovereign will of God that Biden was put in power and you didn’t see rioting and the burning down of cities like the radical left does. When you find a weasel like Sub who constantly accuses any Christian who believes in voting on moral issues guilty of corrupting the gospel because they engage with the culture, but who is so cowardly he won’t even tell us who he voted for, you know something isn’t right. Sub tell us who you voted for so next time we clueless Christians may know who is righteous enough to get our votes.
 
Last edited:
“Certainly, I’d like to rend my condolences to the family of Mr. Kirk and his next of kin, and certainly we sympathize with him. Moreover, he was defending those traditional values.” Vladimir Putin

Even Vladimir Putin is a Christian Nationalist!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1973821617584402449
 
biscuit1953 said:
“Certainly, I’d like to rend my condolences to the family of Mr. Kirk and his next of kin, and certainly we sympathize with him. Moreover, he was defending those traditional values.” Vladimir Putin

Even Vladimir Putin is a Christian Nationalist!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1973821617584402449
Click to expand...
Oh boy, now all the lefties & Libtards are going to equate Kirk-ism with Russia since Putin said this...
Here we go...
 
biscuit1953 said:
John MacArthur denied the Eternal Sonship of Christ for many years until 1999 when he finally recanted that position.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but he and R. C. Sproul disagreed about the meaning of Matthew 20, though they remained close friends.
 
biscuit1953 said:
...
The thing I reject is the absurd idea that anyone who publicly supported and voted for Donald Trump as opposed to Joe Biden or Kamala Harris is a “Christian Nationalist” that wishes to bring in a theocracy. Every Christian I know personally accepted the election of Joe Biden in 2020 even though most believed it was rigged. They believed it was the sovereign will of God that Biden was put in power and you didn’t see rioting and the burning down of cities like the radical left does.
Click to expand...

Amen and AMEN!
 
The post was a refutation of the insistence that there is no such thing as Christian Nationalism or that it is an innocuous fringe.
 
subllibrm said:
The post was a refutation of the insistence that there is no such thing as Christian Nationalism or that it is an innocuous fringe.
Click to expand...
No. You consistently paint anyone who publicly supports Donald Trump and voted for him as being in the camp of a "Christian Nationalist."
 
illinoisguy said:
Wilson believes the basic unit of democracy should be the household: Each household gets a vote, with the husband and father controlling the ballot."
Click to expand...
Basically American society (and practically all of Christendom) prior to the 19th Amendment.
 
subllibrm said:
The post was a refutation of the insistence that there is no such thing as Christian Nationalism or that it is an innocuous fringe.
Click to expand...
Who says Christian Nationalism doesn't exist, and do you believe it to be a movement that is something other than fringe? If so, please elaborate with some credible academic/sociological links. I truly am more than a little interested.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top