Doug Wilson, who writes about sex robots as way of bashing a sister in Christ (Aimee Byrd), defends slavery, and has a history of mishandling sex abuse in his church. Yeah, again, I'll pass on his nonsense.

http://sitler.moscowid.net/
https://moscowid.net/tag/sexual-abuse/
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/scandal-in-moscow/
https://timfall.com/2014/05/05/douglas-wilson-tells-blacks-slavery-good/ (although he does seem to walk back a little from his unabashed racism espoused in Slavery as it Was in his more recent book Black and Tan)

Wilson doesn't call slavery good. He calls it an evil system.

He wrote about that because some were trying to go all John Brown on abortion clinics.

Why don't you read his book on slavery?

Why don't I? Because I tend to not read books by men who cover for pedophiles, claims that it could be argued that the black family was never stronger than under slavery, and writes misogynistic books about sex robots in order to attack a sister in Christ. The guy has zero credibility in my eyes. I'd rather read books by legitimate theologians.

Voddie Baucham is grateful for providence. Look at Africa is what he would likely state.

Patriot101 said:

---

Voddie Baucham is grateful for providence. Look at Africa is what he would say.

---

So is it your position that slaves should have been grateful for being enslaved, tortured, separated from family, etc? Are you in agreement with Wilson that it can be argued that the black family may have never been stronger than when under slavery? Seriously?

And what of Wilson's covering for, and defense of, a pedophile and repeated mishandling of sex abuse?

Like I said, I'll read legitimate theologians. Not misogynists who cover for pedophiles and whitewash chattel slavery. You do you, though. I find that whole "Reformed" crowd that Wilson is part of to be objectionable, as we see how they interact on social media.

From a Willliam Cowper hymn:

"Behind a frowning providence, He hides a smiling face."

Patriot101 said:

---

From a Willliam Cowper hymn:

"Behind a frowning providence, He hides a smiling face."

---

You aren't answering questions.

I'm not qualified to answer for such providence.

Why do i have to work a $14 an hour job?

Such questions I leave to God to work out his plan.

Quote:

---

What compromise is made in politics? Our entire dynamic for twenty (50? 100? 232?) years has been an escalating game of winner take all brinkmanship.

---

Quote:

---

The problem is not a dismantling of our democracy. The problem is the dismantling of our republic, which gave us a democracy, which is a known political instability.

---

It is dangerous for a society to allow politics and politicking to seep into every aspect of life (ie universal suffrage democracy).

The same can be said for Christianity.

PacifistAg said:

---

Why don't I? Because I tend to not read books by men who cover for pedophiles, claims that it could be argued that the black family was never stronger than under slavery, and writes misogynistic books about sex robots in order to attack a sister in Christ. The guy has zero credibility in my eyes. I'd rather read books by legitimate theologians.

---

Should we write you or your belief off based on who you were under earlier handles? Are you less a sinner? Are you such a better judge of character, that you know the 'right' shepherd to sit under or the 'right' gatekeeper for theology? Paul said he was the greatest of sinners. Would you stand before us and say he was right, or would you confess your own sins?

I say this only that you would stop keeping account of the sins of others as a reason to not to engage with them. Shepherds don't choose their sheep and none of us get to choose those who claim Christ. Why should that luxury be afforded you? If we do not work to heal division inside the church how can we possibly think we'll heal it outside?

Patriot101 said:

---

I'm not qualified to answer for such providence.

Why do i have to work a $14 an hour job?

Such questions I leave to God to work out his plan.

---

You've been quick to trot out answers from Baucham and Cowper in response to these issues. I'm curious as to your response. Don't hid behind others, so I'll ask again:

So is it your position that slaves should have been grateful for being enslaved, tortured, separated from family, etc? Are you in agreement with Wilson that it can be argued that the black family may have never been stronger than when under slavery? Seriously?

And what of Wilson's covering for, and defense of, a pedophile and repeated mishandling of sex abuse?

AGC said:

---

PacifistAg said:

---

Why don't I? Because I tend to not read books by men who cover for pedophiles, claims that it could be argued that the black family was never stronger than under slavery, and writes misogynistic books about sex robots in order to attack a sister in Christ. The guy has zero credibility in my eyes. I'd rather read books by legitimate theologians.

---

Should we write you or your belief off based on who you were under earlier handles? Are you less a sinner? Are you such a better judge of character, that you know the 'right' shepherd to sit under or the 'right' gatekeeper for theology? Paul said he was the greatest of sinners. Would you stand before us and say he was right, or would you confess your own sins?

I say this only that you would stop keeping account of the sins of others as a reason to not to engage with them. Shepherds don't choose their sheep and none of us get to choose those who claim Christ. Why should that luxury be afforded you? If we do not work to heal division inside the church how can we possibly think we'll heal it outside?

---

Wilson hasn't really changed. Heck, his book about sex robots to attack Aimee Byrd was just released. He's never backed down from his defense of a pedophiles in his midst. In short, we've seen no evidence of repentance for that. You can tell the difference between me and GigEm01. I didn't say anything about him claiming Christ. I choose not to engage because I've long dusted off my sandals when it comes to him and his ilk. But when someone trots him out as an authority, I believe it is important to warn others of what this man is actually like.

Oh, and you're welcome to write off what I believe for any reason. Heck, I know there are plenty here that do, as I've been called every name in the book for promoting Christian nonviolence, open theism, and showing love towards the LGBTQIA community. You know what I believe, just as I know what Wilson believes. You can write it off or engage in fruitless discussions. Your call.

PacifistAg said:

---

AGC said:

---

PacifistAg said:

---

Why don't I? Because I tend to not read books by men who cover for pedophiles, claims that it could be argued that the black family was never stronger than under slavery, and writes misogynistic books about sex robots in order to attack a sister in Christ. The guy has zero credibility in my eyes. I'd rather read books by legitimate theologians.

---

Should we write you or your belief off based on who you were under earlier handles? Are you less a sinner? Are you such a better judge of character, that you know the 'right' shepherd to sit under or the 'right' gatekeeper for theology? Paul said he was the greatest of sinners. Would you stand before us and say he was right, or would you confess your own sins?

I say this only that you would stop keeping account of the sins of others as a reason to not to engage with them. Shepherds don't choose their sheep and none of us get to choose those who claim Christ. Why should that luxury be afforded you? If we do not work to heal division inside the church how can we possibly think we'll heal it outside?

---

Wilson hasn't really changed. Heck, his book about sex robots to attack Aimee Byrd was just released. He's never backed down from his defense of a pedophiles in his midst. In short, we've seen no evidence of repentance for that. You can tell the difference between me and GigEm01. I didn't say anything about him claiming Christ. I choose not to engage because I've long dusted off my sandals when it comes to him and his ilk. But when someone trots him out as an authority, I believe it is important to warn others of what this man is actually like.

Oh, and you're welcome to write off what I believe for any reason. Heck, I know there are plenty here, as I've been called every name in the book for promoting Christian nonviolence and showing love towards the LGBTQIA community. You know what I believe, just as I know what Wilson believes. You can write it off or engage in fruitless discussions. Your call.

---

I think we must recognize that all truth is God's truth. You don't have to like him but it doesn't mean he can't offer insight or useful commentary.

I read your comments every time despite disagreeing vehemently with things that your permit and embrace. If I were to rattle off the litany of sins you commit here every time you post, others could (and should) rightfully ask how I could preach grace and forgiveness with so little understanding of it myself.

You know yourself far better than you know Wilson. You can name far more of your own sins than you could of his. And I think this is part of the point in asking who will cast the first stone. It's not just that you've sinned but you only have a complete inventory of one person's shortcomings: your own! Can you count his as more numerous than yours when you live with yourself every day? Are you sure yours aren't greater if you step outside your own perspective? For who can have God's perspective to judge but God himself. It is for your own sake and your own soul that I think you should reformulate how you lodge your objections.

Okay. I'll continue to speak against any "teacher" who peddles things that are contrary to the gospel. Or those who cover for pedophiles that prey on children. If doing so is a sin, then I'll work on that with my Savior.

Have a good day, brother.

PacifistAg said:

---

Okay. Have a good day, brother. I'll continue to speak against any "teacher" who peddles things that are contrary to the gospel. Or those who cover for pedophiles that prey on children. If doing so is a sin, then I'll work on that with my Savior.

---

That's not what I said at all but so be it. You do likewise.

The problem of evil is all I capture from your argumentation, Pacifist.

But without God there is no final justice.

Patriot101 said:

---

The problem of evil is all I capture from your argumentation, Pacifist.

But without God there is no final justice.

---

Still avoiding the questions.

Still using the same argument as atheists use against Christianity and Judaism.

Douglas Wilson and Piper:

"First, the Piper Letters
Important update: John Piper wrote me privately to say (and to say vigorously) that he does not hold to the two assumptions that I attributed to him in Monday's post. He does not believe that all sins are equal, and he does not believe that any action that provokes a vile response is thereby a vile action. He was kind enough to send a link with regard to the first one. So I am happy to make clear that those two assumptions are plainly rejected by John (when considered in isolation). Unfortunately, we still have our disagreement about his article because (in my view) if you take those two assumptions away, the article loses all of its force. With regard to the first assumption, John's point was "simply to raise the stakes," which in the context of his article meant putting Trump's bluster and bravado on all fours with Biden's embrace of the culture of death. I still don't see how that can be done without putting any sin that damns the sinner on the same level with other sins that damn other sinners. And with regard to the second assumption, John wrote, "The last five years bear vivid witness to this infection at almost every level of society." The assumption comes out here in that all the vitriol we have seen is treated as an emanation from Trump. John and I are continuing to talk, and I will keep you posted."

https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/letters-5-12-20-2-2-2-2-12-9.html

Patriot101 said:

---

Still using the same argument as atheists use against Christianity and Judaism.

---

I'm a Christian. I'm just asking you to answer a few questions, which you seem to be doing everything you can to avoid. It's fine. I think your answers made clear by your avoidance.

And you are using the argument of an agnostic or atheist. Just saying.

It's another reason why Wilson wrote the book that you are bashing.

The fact that so many can't separate the man from his platform is hard for me to understand. Let me ask you this, if you viewed Trump solely through the lens of his actions vs his tweets, how would you vote?

This man has done more for unborn babies, Christians, and Israel than and president in my lifetime.

I've never cared for Pipers theology or sermons. It's fine that many here love him, but that article read as a man struggling in his journal between faith and civic duty. It felt like a damsel in distress waiting for the return of the Lord to save me from all of these sinners and their wretched ways. C'mon. I'm voting for Trump and my conscious is squeaky clean.

65% of all black families are single parent homes.

https://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/107-children-in-single-parent-families-by-race#detailed/1/any/false/37,871,870,573,869,36,868,867,133,38/10,11,9,12,1,185,13/432,431

Hopefully the Platinum Plan helps.

If the Doug Wilson debate is over, here is Grudem's response:

https://www.christianpost.com/voices/a-response-to-my-friend-john-piper-about-voting-for-trump.html?fbclid=IwAR1BxTeQ9rI7DTT2RviW4RboKbvkmlaAgaxPZLPSXBtFZssWqNZL-IQRXEY

Round two

https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/a-second-round-on-john-piper-me-and-the-cool-shame-election.html

A friend posted this on another form of social media....

Frightened by the logic pastor John Piper seems to be using regarding voting in his recent article. Should Christians vote? Absolutely. How should they vote? Choose the candidates whose policies do not conflict with Scripture. Policies and record must be the issues, not the individual. Why? How can I know the man? God does. I don't. However, I can see what policies he supports and/ or endorses. We should vote based on the policies we want to see enacted...for every Christian that should be policies that have no obvious conflict with Scripture. As for a candidate's individual sin...well I agree that sin leads to death and God will certainly deal with that one way or another (cf Daniel 4). However, I have the responsibility to vote based on the issues I can see, not my subjective appraisal of whether a person is a sinner in specific areas. A Christian should vote...and that vote should be based on polices you will one day live with.

Quote:

---

Should Christians vote? Absolutely.

---

Why? If you want to vote, fine. But blanket statements that "absolutely" Christians should vote are flat out incorrect. I am a Christian and do not vote. To do so would violate my conscience and where my faith in Christ has taken me.

Quote:

---

How should they vote? Choose the candidates whose policies do not conflict with Scripture.

---

Uh, then don't vote. I agree.

Quote:

---

Policies and record must be the issues, not the individual.

---

It's amazing how this has changed when the morally bankrupt individual is on your team. All we heard in the 90's was how "character counts", and that personal character failings made one unfit to be POTUS.

I am a Christian and can't imagine not voting.

Line up and wait 18L said:

---

I am a Christian and can't imagine not voting.

---

And that's fine for you. I can't imagine myself voting. I think I laid out my reasons earlier in this thread, but I can explain again if you'd like to understand my perspective.

Quote:

---

Imagine that America collapses. First anarchy, then tyranny from the right or the left. Imagine that religious freedom is gone. What remains for Christians is fines, prison, exile, and martyrdom.

---

There is only one party that is actively destroying Christianity...

flintdragon said:

---

Quote:

---

Imagine that America collapses. First anarchy, then tyranny from the right or the left. Imagine that religious freedom is gone. What remains for Christians is fines, prison, exile, and martyrdom.

---

There is only one party that is actively destroying Christianity...

---

Christianity can't be destroyed by a political party. Plus, there are devout followers of Christ in both parties.

Also, the sad thing is that I have no idea which political party you're referring to.

PacifistAg said:

---

AGC said:

---

PacifistAg said:

---

Why don't I? Because I tend to not read books by men who cover for pedophiles, claims that it could be argued that the black family was never stronger than under slavery, and writes misogynistic books about sex robots in order to attack a sister in Christ. The guy has zero credibility in my eyes. I'd rather read books by legitimate theologians.

---

Should we write you or your belief off based on who you were under earlier handles? Are you less a sinner? Are you such a better judge of character, that you know the 'right' shepherd to sit under or the 'right' gatekeeper for theology? Paul said he was the greatest of sinners. Would you stand before us and say he was right, or would you confess your own sins?

I say this only that you would stop keeping account of the sins of others as a reason to not to engage with them. Shepherds don't choose their sheep and none of us get to choose those who claim Christ. Why should that luxury be afforded you? If we do not work to heal division inside the church how can we possibly think we'll heal it outside?

---

Wilson hasn't really changed. Heck, his book about sex robots to attack Aimee Byrd was just released. He's never backed down from his defense of a pedophiles in his midst. In short, we've seen no evidence of repentance for that. You can tell the difference between me and GigEm01. I didn't say anything about him claiming Christ. I choose not to engage because I've long dusted off my sandals when it comes to him and his ilk. But when someone trots him out as an authority, I believe it is important to warn others of what this man is actually like.

Oh, and you're welcome to write off what I believe for any reason. Heck, I know there are plenty here that do, as I've been called every name in the book for promoting Christian nonviolence, open theism, and showing love towards the LGBTQIA community. You know what I believe, just as I know what Wilson believes. You can write it off or engage in fruitless discussions. Your call.

---

His point was piggy backing off of C.S. Lewis from "The Abolition of Man." Lewis chose the word apparatus. Sex apparatus...basically. I've read it.

Patriot101 said:

---

PacifistAg said:

---

AGC said:

---

PacifistAg said:

---

Why don't I? Because I tend to not read books by men who cover for pedophiles, claims that it could be argued that the black family was never stronger than under slavery, and writes misogynistic books about sex robots in order to attack a sister in Christ. The guy has zero credibility in my eyes. I'd rather read books by legitimate theologians.

---

Should we write you or your belief off based on who you were under earlier handles? Are you less a sinner? Are you such a better judge of character, that you know the 'right' shepherd to sit under or the 'right' gatekeeper for theology? Paul said he was the greatest of sinners. Would you stand before us and say he was right, or would you confess your own sins?

I say this only that you would stop keeping account of the sins of others as a reason to not to engage with them. Shepherds don't choose their sheep and none of us get to choose those who claim Christ. Why should that luxury be afforded you? If we do not work to heal division inside the church how can we possibly think we'll heal it outside?

---

Wilson hasn't really changed. Heck, his book about sex robots to attack Aimee Byrd was just released. He's never backed down from his defense of a pedophiles in his midst. In short, we've seen no evidence of repentance for that. You can tell the difference between me and GigEm01. I didn't say anything about him claiming Christ. I choose not to engage because I've long dusted off my sandals when it comes to him and his ilk. But when someone trots him out as an authority, I believe it is important to warn others of what this man is actually like.

Oh, and you're welcome to write off what I believe for any reason. Heck, I know there are plenty here that do, as I've been called every name in the book for promoting Christian nonviolence, open theism, and showing love towards the LGBTQIA community. You know what I believe, just as I know what Wilson believes. You can write it off or engage in fruitless discussions. Your call.

---

His point was piggy backing off of C.S. Lewis from "The Abolition of Man." Lewis chose the word apparatus. Sex apparatus...basically. I've read it.

---

Yeah, no. It was an attack on Aimee Byrd's theology (see her recent book Recovering from Biblical Manhood & Womanhood). That's according to his own pastoral assistant:

Of course, this also doesn't address the fact that he covers for pedophiles and repeatedly mishandled child sex abuse in his church.