How to spot a faker.

In the introduction of Reforming Marriage Pastor Wilson explains why some men do everything right but their wives are still unhappy.  The reason this happens is the man isn’t right with God (emphasis mine):

In other words, keeping God’s law with a whole heart (which is really what love is) is not only seen in overt acts of obedience. The collateral effect of obedience is the aroma of love. This aroma is out of reach for those who have a hypocritical desire to be known by others as a keeper of God’s law. Many can fake an attempt at keeping God’s standards in some external way. What we cannot fake is the resulting, distinctive aroma of pleasure to God.

…This is why I am afraid that this book will be of little use to those who simply want a “formula” to follow that will build them a happy marriage. When it comes to the externals, the mere copyist can always say of himself what the unregenerate Saul could say, “concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless” (Phil. 3:6). However hard the externalist tries, he cannot produce the aroma of godliness. This is why so many people attend marriage seminars and read marriage books with so little result. The obedience of the Christian man is not limited to new actions—actions which, after all, can be copied mechanically. This does not appear to be a rare or unusual error; many people who are miserable in their marriages are also those who have read all the books on how not to be. Of course, certain actions—godly obedience in externals—must be present in all healthy marriages; but in order to produce this distinctive aroma, the externals must proceed from new hearts.

…the love of the Christian husband does not proceed from reading the “right books,” including this one, or going to the right seminars. God will not patch His grace onto some humanistic psychological nonsense—even if that nonsense is couched and buried in Christian terminology.

When a husband seeks to glorify God in his home, he will be equipped to love his wife as he is commanded. And if he loves his wife as commanded, the aroma of his home will be pleasant indeed.

Note how well this ties in with the psychology of the frivolous divorcée.  She is absolutely certain that her husband is the reason she is so terribly unhappy.  The more he does what she (and Wilson, and Oprah) demands, the more furious and miserable she becomes!  Finally Wilson comes along and explains why she feels this way.  It is because her husband is a hypocrite.  Sure he does everything he is told to do, but he is a fraud, and God is using her feelings of discontentment to show the world the truth!

See Also:  How to tell if you are a godly man.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Pastor Doug Wilson, Wife worship. Bookmark the permalink.

173 Responses to How to spot a faker.

  1. donalgraeme says:

    What makes this truly vile is that this whole thing is non-falsifiable. There is no way on Earth to prove what is really going on in a man’s heart. So wives can rebel all the day long, and there is no way to prove it wasn’t what Wilson describes here.

  2. Pingback: How to spot a faker. | @the_arv

  3. Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM) says:

    Pastor Wilson’s snakey, defensive logic works like this:

    Wilson: It is very warm in Chicago.
    Dalrock: No, it is very cold in Chicago.
    Wilson: You are wrong, my little lost sheep, for it is very warm in Miami.

  4. 7817 says:

    So any man whose wife is unhappy is probably a hypocrite.

    This is how we can know Wilson is promoting idolatry (woman worship) even though he warns men not to worship their wives.

    If the only way you can be pleasing to God is to keep your wife happy, there is no place to stop short of worshipping her.

    It looks like Wilson’s admonition to not worship your wife is just there to keep husbands permanently confused and submissive (trying to jump through the mutually exclusive hoops), because Wilson’s actual counsel (plainly quoted above) is that when you glorify God your wife will be happy:

    “When a husband seeks to glorify God in his home, he will be equipped to love his wife as he is commanded. And if he loves his wife as commanded, the aroma of his home will be pleasant indeed.”

  5. RedPillPaul says:

    I guess Job should have made his wife happy and “curse God and die!” Job 2:9

  6. RedPillPaul says:

    Notice the bible has the “!” after her statement

  7. earl says:

    Wilson: It is very warm in Chicago.
    Dalrock: No, it is very cold in Chicago.
    Wilson: You are wrong, my little lost sheep, for it is very warm in Miami.

    If only Chicago was like Miami…then Chicago would receive God’s blessing.

  8. earl says:

    When a husband seeks to glorify God in his home, he will be equipped to love his wife as he is commanded. And if he loves his wife as commanded, the aroma of his home will be pleasant indeed.

    What if she stinks it up by not respecting him or submitting to him as she is commanded to? He keeps forgetting about that I noticed.

  9. 7817 says:

    “What if she stinks it up by not respecting him or submitting to him as she is commanded to?”

    That’s how you know the man is a hypocrite. The wife is the weathervane showing the direction of the wind of God’s approval.

  10. PokeSalad says:

    and of course……….who is the infallible fraud-detector who unerringly sniffs out this chicanery? Is it the Word of God? The counsels of the Church? Like-minded men from the congregation?

    Heavens no!

    It’s the WIFE, silly! All ‘real men in Jesus’ know that! It’s like having Christ right there in your own home, keeping your paths straight!

  11. Lost Patrol says:

    What I’ve learned from the last several posts – Doug fences in the whole ranch, then leaves all the gates open.

  12. Matt says:

    God will not patch His grace onto some humanistic psychological nonsense—even if that nonsense is couched and buried in Christian terminology.

    Ain’t that the truth.

  13. PokeSalad says:

    It looks like Wilson’s admonition to not worship your wife is just there to keep husbands permanently confused and submissive (trying to jump through the mutually exclusive hoops), because Wilson’s actual counsel (plainly quoted above) is that when you glorify God your wife will be happy:

    Fret not, surely kate0-whatever will be along shortly to set us all straight, and that we are simply too simple to grasp the true meaning of the Word of Wilson.

  14. Marquess of Cruddyberry says:

    I’m scouring the memory banks now, but until I remember a bigger stinker, the “aroma of love” ranks up there as the most awkward, off-putting, hackneyed, self-defeating conceit I have ever encountered.

    (I’m triggered. I need my safe space.)

    The real “aroma of love” is a witches’ brew of sebaceous ooze, fungal-bacterial biomat effluent, sweat and glandular emissions overlayed with the subtle piquancy of industrial chemistry.

    And sometimes menthol, if she’s a classy lady.

  15. American says:

    Speaking of fake ideas turned on their head: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news/os-altamonte-springs-easter-fire-20180403-story.html

    Wow, you mean all males are not evil oppressors and all females are not their victims? But that’s what the liberal media and school system told me since pre-school.

  16. The problem with all this verbal hedgery is that disciples are not pundits. The two populations have entirely different reactions to things written. Pundits will look for logical inconsistencies, mis-steps, etc. Those trying to actually learn something will be much more forgiving on that score, but much more demanding of actual wisdom. How many had to screw up, and how badly, that Heartiste was able to contribute something of value?

    Every time a pastor hedges to avoid the ire of feminists, a young Christian man discovers the pickup artists. Heaven grant that he doesn’t linger.

  17. Spike says:

    In short, A man can’t do anything right when it comes to woman’s happiness.
    Best avoid them.

  18. Morgan says:

    How will we judge if a man is righteous if he has no wife? Clearly we cannot judge him by his actions, as these can be done mechanically. No, we must force him to marry, then see what his wife thinks of him. He volunteers to coach little league? His wife says he should spend more time with her. He donates to the church? His wife says he’s too cheap to take her out to dinner. He’s a priest? What a Peter Pan boy afraid to man up and take care of a woman.

  19. casparreyes says:

    Most pulpits do a similar twist on 1 Pe 3 about prayers being hindered. They tell you that if your wife doesn’t feel honored then your prayers will bounce off the ceiling. I told my family, when God sees a man praying does he check with the wife to see if He should answer? And they all laughed because even the young ones saw how ridiculous that was.

  20. earl says:

    ‘You husbands in the same way, live with your wives in an understanding way, as with someone weaker, since she is a woman; and show her honor as a fellow heir of the grace of life, so that your prayers will not be hindered.’

    Guess women better quit telling us they are all strong and independent then. Wouldn’t want to confuse us men into thinking they aren’t the weaker vessel and our prayers get hindered.

  21. Pingback: How to spot a faker. | Reaction Times

  22. Anonymous Reader says:

    Marquess of Cruddyberry says:
    I’m scouring the memory banks now, but until I remember a bigger stinker, the “aroma of love” ranks up there as the most awkward, off-putting, hackneyed, self-defeating conceit I have ever encountered.

    Seconded. Call the vote!

    Plus what’s Wilson doing, sniffing around another man’s wife like that? Huh? Huh?
    “Not OK!” as the kids say.

  23. Sharkly says:

    I can’t say I ever remember my wife being in the mood after going to church.(Sad,….Perhaps if men were honored there) Not like she might get after watching some romantic comedy at home. If I’m to try to pin down where the “Aroma of Love” come’s from, I only ever remember my wife initiating sex completely without my consent, one time in our lives. She watched a “Rom-Com” where she saw some guys naked butt, and then she, of her own accord, put on lingerie, and came into the bedroom and began sexually molesting me as I was napping. Obviously I took what I could get and was not going to complain that the “aroma of love” had actually originated from some other dude’s butt.

  24. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    George Washington University is attacking Christian privilege: https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/43577/

    Just four days after Easter, George Washington University will host a training session for students and faculty that teaches that Christians — especially white ones — “receive unmerited perks from institutions and systems all across our country.”

    The April 5 diversity workshop is titled “Christian Privilege: But Our Founding Fathers Were All Christian, Right?!”

    Hosted by the university’s Multicultural Student Services Center, the event will teach that Christians enjoy a privileged, easier life than their non-Christian counterparts, and that Christians possess “built-in advantages” today, according to its online description.

    I have some experience working in Hollywood. No Christian privilege there. Being a Christian is something you hide, or at least downplay. But if you belong to another, more privileged religion, many more doors will open for you. Job discrimination works in your favor.

  25. Nitpic says:

    Actually, the wretch is sort of right, although in a very different way than he would like to be. Every reasonable man will tell you that worshipping your wife is a way to make her miserable, not the way to make her happy. And so if you listen to both Wilson´s pieces of advice – don´t worship her and make her happy, it might work. Just don´t listen to his advice on how to make her happy. As for the theological mambo-jumbo he tries to wrap his crap in, I´m kind of surprised the women don´t get mad about his message: if the woman´s happiness is dependent on the actings of their husbands being endowed with the divine unhappiness, it implies inevitably that women are mere tools of God´s corrective force for the benefit of men and thus have less free will than men and thus are logically inferiour to men.

  26. Opus says:

    Kate Chopin

    Kat Echo

    Katecho: to detain or hold back (Greek)

    I once attended a seminar at GWU but for the life of me cannot recall what it was about but whatever it did concern it was not about Christian Privilege. Anyway, I thought America was a Christian nation – you certainly give a very strong impression that that is the case or is that done for the purpose of lulling unsuspecting visitors into a false sense of security. I expect Americans to be Christian, anything less would be a disappointment and to confound expectations. The English – not so much, for to voice ones religious views is seen as excruciatingly embarrassing and a sign that one is a ‘nutter’- see the Tracy Ullman job-interview clip. We are C&E Christmas and Easter (both optional).

  27. Paul says:

    Wilson: And if he loves his wife as commanded, the aroma of his home will be pleasant indeed.

    Well, what if the foul stench of his wife caused by her sinful and rebellious actions overpower the aroma of his love? Would not his (!!) home have a disgusting rotten smell?

  28. Hmm says:

    Dal – thanks for your extended answer to my post in the previous meta. I see your rationale now. And I agree with donalgraeme – it’s nonfalsifiable, which makes it terrible advice.

    “The aroma just isn’t there. You appear to be doing everything the Biblical way. It must be that your heart is hypocritical. Oh, of course a hypocrite would deny it!”

    It’s a claim to be able to detect the false heart of an obedient man by looking at the fruit, not of his own life, but that of the people in his family, any of whom may be the hypocritical one(s). Reading the heart is God’s responsibility, not ours.

    Of course, Wilson would (does) say that the man is responsible for the fruit his family produces.

  29. squid_hunt says:

    Why is Jesus such a terrible husband? If he really loved his wife, she’d be happy and submissive to him! The aroma in his home is one of rebellion. Something is clearly going on there!

    Carrot and stick. It’s disgusting to treat men of God this way.

  30. squid_hunt says:

    @Anonymous Reader

    Plus what’s Wilson doing, sniffing around another man’s wife like that?

    That’s a very good question. Black his eyes for him, he’ll stop trying to seduce her.

  31. Jay says:

    The most righteous man on earth is still a sinner, a mistake-maker, someone who will snap or react in the wrong way at some point and in return, provoke or otherwise alienate his wife.

    Personally, I would look at the sins of my youth, my rebellion against my parents as a higher cause of marital woes. You disrepected your mother and father when you were young and then you wonder why you have a rebellious wife and all is not well with you?

  32. Omega Man says:

    Ah yes, the aroma of love. How many men here have heard their wives loudly pass wind?

    Bet none of you have heard or smelled the aroma before you got married!

  33. Bee says:

    From the quote by Wilson,

    “However hard the externalist tries, he cannot produce the aroma of godliness. ”

    In other areas we see that when non-Christians follow God’s principles and laws they get blessed, they achieve good outcomes. Contrary to Wilson, I am sure this also works for marriages.

  34. Jonadab-the-Rechabite says:

    Wilson is right, Job was faker, Hosea was a faker but David when he danced before the Lord was an ubber-faker.

  35. sipcode says:

    Funny how Wilson applies this so-called fakeness of obedience to the husband and not the wife. Funny how the whole church does.

    No, it is not funny. It is damnation. Wilson, who’s “damnation slumbereth not.”

  36. sipcode says:

    1 Peter 3:1 makes it clear that the husband does not have to be godly for the wife to be happy …er, be herself.

    Scripture never talks about seeking happiness. We only seek holiness — keeping His commandments, then He provides joy unspeakable.

    God damned liars.

  37. dvdivx says:

    Look I get the fact that Wilson is serving Satan. Could pick many more pastors putting idols like the vagina before God. Not a shortage. How about someone doing something right. Its like a dead horse. Wilson’s not going to change. His heart has hardened and does not belong to God nor his Son. We get that. How about a post of what is right?

  38. OKRickety says:

    Dalrock,

    I suggest you add a link back to your posts about the other Pastor Wilson (Dave) such as How to tell if you are a godly man where we see the claim that “a man’s relationship with God is key to unlocking the mystery of marital intimacy.”

    [D: Good point. Thank you. Added.]

  39. Joe says:

    “dvdivx says:
    April 4, 2018 at 9:31 am
    Look I get the fact that Wilson is serving Satan. Could pick many more pastors putting idols like the vagina before God. Not a shortage. How about someone doing something right.”

    I was going to say the same thing. Who’s writing the right stuff?
    Dalrock did a post a few posts ago “Links to posts for Christian husbands”.

    https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2018/03/02/links-to-posts-for-christian-husbands/

  40. Anonymous Reader says:

    Hmm
    Yes, it is as Donal said, non-falsifiable. Rather like witch-sniffing from centuries back.

    Of course, Wilson would (does) say that the man is responsible for the fruit his family produces.

    Oh, ok. God is responsible for the fruit that human beings produce too, right? It is the same logic, how could it be false? Or is that bad theology? If it’s bad theology, what does that say about Wilson’s argument?

    Does “free will” exist in your denomination?

  41. Cloudbuster says:

    donalgraeme: “What makes this truly vile is that this whole thing is non-falsifiable. There is no way on Earth to prove what is really going on in a man’s heart. So wives can rebel all the day long, and there is no way to prove it wasn’t what Wilson describes here.”

    Yes, that’s what I wanted to say. I experienced this in Christian counseling many years ago and it was so utterly dispiriting, It’s cult-like programming and it is cruel.

  42. BJ says:

    When Douglas Wilson is placed into the same feminist camp as Oprah, you know you the debate has jumped the shark. Dalrock needs to regain a sense of perspective on this.

  43. Dalrock says:

    @Anon Reader

    Does “free will” exist in your denomination?

    This is a sticky subject because Wilson is a Calvinist. Note the use of the term “unregenerate” regarding Saul pre road to Damascus. But whether you read this as a Calvinist or not, Wilson is saying the same thing either way. If a wife isn’t happy and her husband is doing all the right actions, her displeasure is God’s sign that the man isn’t saved.

  44. Joe says:

    “Of course, Wilson would (does) say that the man is responsible for the fruit his family produces”.

    This, I think, implies that the man is not. So then… Who is? Sometimes I think we are talking in a big circle and the spinning arrow doesn’t land anywhere.

    I know how I and my wife did it. I just want to know what you guys think.

  45. Jon Patch says:

    This is truly evil. Gives an out to not only wives, but also justifies the “christian” shrinks and counselors to condemn husbands. I was there. Even tho I was completely devoted, hard working husband and father, ex decided I was not right with God and just going through the motions because she just didn’t FEEL right about me, told me I needed to fix myself and when I asked what that entailed, it was dramatically stated that I had to figure it out myself. Counselor said same mumbo jumbo and I got the hell out of there and never looked back. Ex divorced me promptly because I was unwilling to work on marriage in this manner. Church backed her, outcast me. Done

  46. da GBFM zlzoolzlzzlzozlzloozozo says:

    Who’s writing the right stuff?

    Dalrock is!

    The Bible is indeed there, but the proper and exalted transmission of the Spirit of the Law has ever relied on Dalrocks fighting for it.

    The classical ideals must be forever performed by the courageous in the contemporary context, whence they are oft treated with disdain by the Scribes and Pharisees, as were Socrates and Jesus.

    No lzlzozolzozozozolzlzozozoz joking!

    lzlzzozozoozoz

  47. Anonymous Reader says:

    Dalrock
    If a wife isn’t happy and her husband is doing all the right actions, her displeasure is God’s sign that the man isn’t saved.

    Got all that, just wondering how much futher out his teaching runs.

    For example, if children are unhaaaaapy under the supervision of their married, Stay At Home Mom, is that a sign of some sort or other about her?
    Or another example, if a family is unhaaaaapy at Wilson’s church, is that a sign of something about Wilson or his status, or his church’s status? What if that family is being counseled by Wilson yet their aroma of happiness is not detectable…that’s his responsibility rather than theirs, right?

    Just trying to figure out if this is a general rule to be observed in all hierarchies, or one that only applies to marrried men…

  48. squid_hunt says:

    @Anonymous Reader

    What if that family is being counseled by Wilson yet their aroma of happiness is not detectable…that’s his responsibility rather than theirs, right?

    That is the question to ask. Boldly, publicly, and without mincing words.

  49. Anonymous Reader says:

    BJ
    When Douglas Wilson is placed into the same feminist camp as Oprah, you know you the debate has jumped the shark.

    Perhaps, although that really depends on one’s perspective. Personally, the idea that a woman’s feeeeelz should rule the house seems quite Oprahesque, and shorn of all the word salad – that’s what Wilson is saying. Her feelz trump reason.

    Sorry if this makes your aroma of happiness less perfumed.

  50. BJ says:

    @Anonymous Reader
    I don’t agree with Wilson on everything, and I don’t agree with the quotes that Dalrock has noted. But Dalrock has lost all of sense of scale if he actually thinks that Wilson and Oprah (as he asserted in this post) are in the same camp. Does Dalrock really think that someone who boldly asserts and practices male headship in the family and the church, openly opposes feminism of all stripes (not just the radical version), and preaches Christ as King of the earth (theocracy) is anywhere near Oprah in terms of our cultural decay? Come on.

    Dalrock’s continued insistence that the two are on the same page diminishes his otherwise insightful thoughts. He is making the same mistake as Wilson did in those quotes by leaning too hard on a narrow point.

  51. In light of the last 3 posts here, not only am I amazed that Christians ever reproduce at all, but I think I get why porn ‘use’ among Christian men is statistically higher than any other demographic of men.

    What a mind job. I understand sex has always been the thumbscrew of men that the church uses to obligate compliance, but in an age where the Feminine Imperative drives doctrine (and by extension faith) and lays out those obligations it’s become a self-perpetuating form of torture for men. Man up, marry those sluts. If she doesn’t want to fuck you – your fault. You don’t behave in the fem-church approved manner that all your male ‘shepherds’ are explaining to you, which the imperative dictates to them.

    Turn to porn to find some kind of sexual release because you didn’t do everything right to appease your wife? Your fault, you lustful male.

    Seriously, what would possibly be viewed as an upside to christian marriage and sex for a guy? For generations (up to even this one) we get this male shame for having repressed women’s sexual natures for so long. This is women’s go-to gripe with the church, but it’s complete bullshit. It’s men’s sexuality that is repressed and used to fuel the church of the Feminine Imperative.

  52. Swanny River says:

    I like the humorous title of the post. It naturally makes one think of women faking it in bed. My experiences with establishing outward habits that aren’t congruent with one’s internal mindset is that it depends. That is, like many things, faking it can be good or bad depending on the provider’s heart and faith. I see myself using the same set of words with my son in a good way and in a bad way, all dependent if I am abiding in Christ and in love or am just expressing my annoyance. Abiding usually means dying to self for me, so were I attempting to counsel a husband about loving her wife, I would present it as rewarding, because it is an opportunity to grow closer to Christ, but also as challenging, because who wants to die to self? I wouldn’t tell that husband though to expect any fruits in the marriage, because there isn’t a biblical basis for such an expectation. I think I am writing something similar to what Wilson did, but somehow it seems different to me. For one, if I am telling someone to die to self, my heart feels heavy, not chastising. Secondly, dying to self for God’s glory could come at a heavy cost if it results in confronting a previously placated, rebellious wife. And I don’t think of what I am saying is reforming marriage, so I don’t understand his book title. If he think he is being biblical, then he could just say that, instead of throwing existing couples under a car.

  53. Swanny River says:

    Please note, I didn’t intend to write a book in my previous post, therefore I didn’t mention women. I definitely do not agree with hairshirts and responsibility without authority, but am only expanding on the idea of faking something in light of the Wilson excerpts.

  54. Damn Crackers says:

    @Rollo – It does appear that the modern state of Christian marriage is trying to square the circle between faith and as you say, the Feminine Imperative. Maybe the only solution is to marry an Amish girl. God knows they need to outbreed to get rid of those six fingers.

  55. Dalrock says:

    @BJ

    When Douglas Wilson is placed into the same feminist camp as Oprah, you know you the debate has jumped the shark. Dalrock needs to regain a sense of perspective on this.

    Here is the offending quote:

    Note how well this ties in with the psychology of the frivolous divorcée. She is absolutely certain that her husband is the reason she is so terribly unhappy. The more he does what she (and Wilson, and Oprah) demands, the more furious and miserable she becomes!

    This is undeniable. Wilson’s demands and the wife’s feelings of resentment come in a cultural context. Wilson is saying his part in the pulpit and in his books. Oprah is giving a secular version of the same message across her forms of media. Both are telling the wife that if her husband really was a good man, she would be happy. If she feels like something isn’t right, this is proof that he really isn’t so good after all.

    What exactly is your objection? I’ve shown where Wilson does this, and you seem to be in agreement that I have accurately pointed out the problem regarding what he wrote in the introduction. Is your objection that I haven’t shown where Oprah teaches the same? Are you saying Oprah doesn’t also teach wives that their feelings are paramount, harbingers of cosmic truth? I took it that my readers would take the last part as a given.

  56. Wraithburn says:

    @Anonymous Reader

    If I’m understanding Wilson correctly, if the children don’t listen to mom, it’s Dad’s fault. If the family doesn’t grow spiritually under Wilson’s teaching, it’s Dad’s fault. After all, the father is Responsible for the entire family. 100 percent, he can’t share the failures with anyone else.

  57. Anonymous Reader says:

    @Dalrock
    “When the flak gets thick, that means you’re over the target”.

  58. da GBFM zlzoolzlzzlzozlzloozozo says:

    Wilson:
    Men shall have 99.99999% responsiblity
    And 0.0000001% authority!
    And so it is that Wilson preaches and teaches
    That men and women share authority and responisibility
    in marriage
    and thus compliment one-another
    as God
    ordained.

  59. Speaking of fakers:

  60. Hmm says:

    @Wraithburn,

    No, no, no, you’ve got it all wrong. The man is responsible, not at fault. There’s a difference (significant to Wilson, I guess) in there somewhere.

  61. “My wife married a loser because I was a good liar, not because she’s got terrible instincts for mate selection. Anyway, she settled for me and I am so thankful she did! She’s lazy and entitled, but Jesus wants me to do what I can to ensure people know I am the chief of sinners.”

  62. BJ says:

    @Dalrock

    Thanks for taking the time to respond.

    I don’t agree with Wilson’s quote about mama being happy, and of course I take it as a given that Oprah is a complete whack job. My objection is that you are equivocating between Wilson’s position and Oprah’s in a way that makes the two seem synonymous. They simply are not, and you know this to be true.

    How do we know they are not? You look at the rest of their work. I think that Wilson’s point in his blog response to you. Oprah has spent her life seeking to encourage women to rebel against men and destroy Western civilization. Wilson has spent his life trying to encourage women to honor God in their marriages. His quotes you cited are wrong, and they are very much open for criticism, but to take that narrow passage, fixate on it, and pretend like this characterizes his whole ministry is out of balance.

    You once said (in How to Field Strip a Baby) you change diapers and do work for your wife at home, so she could take naps. Would it be fair of me to keep repeating that, quote Titus 2 about women keeping the home ad nauseum, and telling people that Dalrock is a raging feminist because he refuses to obey Titus 2? He is basically a shill for Oprah’s worldview? Of course it would not be fair, because the rest of your writings make it clear that you don’t hold water for Oprah. It is also clear from the rest of Wilson’s writings that he doesn’t either. Claim he is contradicting himself, claim he was stupid for writing that passage, claim that passage is undermining the rest of his work. But for the sake of scale, don’t say he the same as Oprah.

    Now I know the comparison is not exact, but I hope you will honest enough to concede the point.

  63. Frank K says:

    A dumb question:

    Why do you guys care so much about what Wilson says? I had never heard of the guy before I came here. Is he super influential in Evangelical circles? Or just in his corner of the universe?

  64. Anonymous Reader says:

    @Wraithburn
    @Hmm

    Clear so far. Now what about a family that doesn’t have the aroma of haaaapiness while under Wilson’s authority; is that a failure of his responsibility, or is something wrong with them, or is this just another failure on the part of the “Honored Guest”?

    This rule looks more and more particular and peculiar. Again I wonder about “free will”…

  65. thedeti says:

    How do we know they are not? You look at the rest of their work.

    It’s interesting that the only way people can defend what Wilson wrote in the intro to Reforming Marriage is to point to other things Wilson has written.

    Wilson must believe (or have believed at one time) what he wrote in that intro, else he wouldn’t have written it. If he doesn’t believe that, then he should have clarified his position on it. Wilson knows it’s important to be clear in his writing because people read his advice and use it to attempt to better their lives.

    What’s under criticism is Wilson’s statement in that intro. It’s bad advice for men and women. But the only way Wilson’s defenders (and Wilson himself) can defend it is to say “but look at what else he has written”.

  66. thedeti says:

    Why do you guys care so much about what Wilson says?

    Because like many Protestant evangelicals, he has written several books on men, women, marriage, and family. By virtue of those writings he holds himself out as an expert on these subjects. He is a seminary trained minister and holds himself out as an expert on theology, and its intersection with marriage and family life. And he makes much the same mistakes that men like Steve Arterburn, James Dobson, Dennis Rainey, Bob LaPine, and so many others make, and for the same reasons.

  67. Swanny River says:

    BJ, why not just ask Dalrock to concede, versus throwing in the bit about being honest enough? Dalrock made a comparison you don’t agree with, and you focus on that because you think it ruins his credibility, fair enough, but to many of us, or at least me, I can say that there are Christians unknowingly in agreement with Oprah and equally destructive with her, though different in world view. I see your pickiness as a distraction to the post instead of a concern about Dalrock, but it’s better I suppose than the polygamy or Reformation distractions.

  68. Anonymous Reader says:

    @BJ

    “Look at the rest of his work”, again? Turn that around. It is obvious that Wilson, like Oprah, is all about women’s feeeeelz as the most important thing in a marriage. What that should do is cause greater scrutiny of all the rest of his work because he has a fundamental error in his thinking. He gets a very basic thing completely wrong: feelz over logic. What else does he get wrong?

    “Women’s feelze matter most” is also one of the marks of feminism, and this is one reason Wilson is obviously a conservative feminist.

    Analogy: If an airline hired pilots who sincerely believed that the Earth is flat, would you trust in them to get you from Los Angeles to Tokyo? Because the Great Circle doesn’t work on a flat dinner plate.

  69. vfm7916 says:

    So I will mention the obvious thing:

    “This is why so many people attend marriage seminars and read marriage books with so little result”

    Should be rephrased with “pay for my” and “buy my” in the place of “attend” and “read”.

    What better way to ensure you have a continuing market for your product? Full consistency with biblical scripture would definitely hurt sales, so best to avoid that.

    However, Wilson should create and market the next obvious thing: L’Homme Dieu

    Available in gallon sizes!

  70. Minesweeper says:

    Wilson, clearly understands nothing about women, women can be demonic, evil, infected with very serious personality disorders, kill their unborn en masse , destroy men/families/children by the millions, destroy society as we know it.

    I would love to claim he is an “idiot” but that is clearly barred by scripture, instead he is false teacher who worms his way into women’s homes and tells them just what their sinful hearts are desperate to hear.

    In other news (aside from the “momma aint happy” moment – so she drives her SUV with 8 kids off a cliff), it seems someone else (even a woman – )gasp)) has picked up on what I and others have observed – young women are done with the whole shit of our culture now and are strangely seeking older men who arn’t down with the collapse of everything, turns out family and kids and maybe happiness just might be important.

    “Why Millennial Women Want to Date Older Men”
    https://acculturated.com/millennial-women/

    ” More and more women I know are dating men twice, yes twice, their age.”

    I guess they are longing for that old time patriarchy. Arn’t we all. Its the appeal of Peterson, he is the father we all wish we had had.

  71. Minesweeper says:

    I missed out for women – “lie continually and repeatedly about literally everything”

  72. earl says:

    instead he is false teacher who worms his way into women’s homes and tells them just what their sinful hearts are desperate to hear.

    It’s been the story since the beginning of humanity. Some people try to fight against it and some take advantage of it.

  73. earl says:

    ‘But there are downsides to large age disparities, and women in particular sacrifice a great deal when they make this choice. Child-bearing and rearing becomes complicated, not to mention the potential for earlier onset of age-related medical challenges, as well as confronting constant social stigma. It’s all pretty inconceivable in the long term, and yet it’s happening all the same. That’s how badly women want to escape the Tinderverse.’

    Heaven forbid a woman has to sacrifice anything. She’s been told since she was 3 she could have it all.

  74. Dalrock says:

    @BJ

    I don’t agree with Wilson’s quote about mama being happy, and of course I take it as a given that Oprah is a complete whack job. My objection is that you are equivocating between Wilson’s position and Oprah’s in a way that makes the two seem synonymous. They simply are not, and you know this to be true.

    I’m not sure I understand your objection here.  I’m not saying Wilson and Oprah are identical.  I’m saying they are both pushing the husband and the wife in very similar directions.  Oprah is going to tell the husband if he wants to make her happy, he needs to be more loving to her.  Buy her gifts, take her to dinner, do the housework.  Wilson differs somewhat in the particulars, but he tells husbands they need to be more loving if they want their wife to be happy.  So he won’t say do the housework, but the basic push is the same.  Then both Wilson and Oprah are telling the wife if these things don’t make her happy, it is a cosmic indictment on her husband.  Her unhaaapy feelings are a divine message that something is very wrong with the man/marriage!  I don’t think this is a coincidence.  Wilson’s advice is deeply rooted in the same wisdom of the 1970s and 1980s that Oprah’s advice is.  The difference is Wilson claims it comes from Ephesians, and Oprah doesn’t.  This makes Wilson’s advice even more toxic than Oprah’s!  But either way, do you honestly think the average unhappy Christian housewife makes a fine distinction between the two.  Both validate her feelings, and tell her what she already knew deep down:  her feelings are a cosmic barometer of whether her husband is good.  This is no less evil when preached from the pulpit than when Oprah preaches it!

    How do we know they are not? You look at the rest of their work. I think that Wilson’s point in his blog response to you. Oprah has spent her life seeking to encourage women to rebel against men and destroy Western civilization. Wilson has spent his life trying to encourage women to honor God in their marriages. His quotes you cited are wrong, and they are very much open for criticism, but to take that narrow passage, fixate on it, and pretend like this characterizes his whole ministry is out of balance.

    As I’ve acknowledged countless times, Wilson frequently contradicts himself.  We all agree on that.  But keep in mind that I first quoted the introduction to Reforming Marriage to point out that my readers were right when they suspected that Wilson himself had told men they needed to keep mama happy.  But even here, they only suspected it in a general sense.  Who would have guessed he actually used that specific phrase as a paraphrase for Scripture?  So yes, Wilson teaches men that if mama isn’t happy, then God is displeased with him.  And yes, Wilson calls husbands who take their wife’s mood as coming from God cowards.  He does both.  This is absolutely true!  But how, seriously, is this a defense of Wilson in your mind?  How do you not see the problem with this?

    You once said (in How to Field Strip a Baby) you change diapers and do work for your wife at home, so she could take naps. Would it be fair of me to keep repeating that, quote Titus 2 about women keeping the home ad nauseum, and telling people that Dalrock is a raging feminist because he refuses to obey Titus 2?

    That post is indeed cringe-worthy.  Not because it is specifically wrong for husbands to help when help is needed, but because it plays into the madness of our culture.  But I’m not sitting her years later calling men who change diapers cowards, pretending that I didn’t have my own hand in pushing men that way.

    More to the point, the introduction to Reforming Marriage is where Wilson explains the perspective of the whole book.  He started with a toxic premise, and wrote an entire book about it.   On top of that, he still preaches this same message.

  75. BJ says:

    @thedeti

    “It’s interesting that the only way people can defend what Wilson wrote in the intro to Reforming Marriage is to point to other things Wilson has written.”

    You are misreading me. I am not defending what Wilson wrote in the intro to Reforming Marriage. I am saying that he not the same as Oprah because of what he wrote.

  76. BJ says:

    @Swanny River

    “BJ, why not just ask Dalrock to concede, versus throwing in the bit about being honest enough?”

    I simply used this as a turn of phrase. I wasn’t trying to insinuate that he is being dishonest. Apologies.

    “but to many of us, or at least me, I can say that there are Christians unknowingly in agreement with Oprah and equally destructive with her, though different in world view.”

    This is very true, and a serious problem, with which I agree. As one who is in full-time ministry, I work very hard not to do this.

    “I see your pickiness as a distraction to the post instead of a concern about Dalrock.”

    Perhaps you are correct, but I assure you I am not trying to be overly picky. I just wanted to try and return this conversation to a sense of balance. Wilson, after all, has been condemned as a tool of Satan on this comments thread.

  77. In other words, keeping God’s law with a whole heart (which is really what love is) is not only seen in overt acts of obedience

    But it is also seen in………WHAT??????.

    He doesn’t complete the thought here because there is no thought to complete. The manner in which he writes this is absolutely perfect for female speak. Its like saying for instance …..”Do these three things to make your marriage and home happy”….

    1. Don’t go to bed angry
    2. Give lots of hugs
    3. Some other third thing

    Wives will dwell in the some other third thing.

    He has come dangerously close to borrowing from the old official definition of porn. You know it when you see it.

    For all the effort wives want to see husbands put forth to know their heart, and for all the associated claims by wife that it is unknowable, Wilson has affirmed what Christian wives have claimed for years. They have perfect discernment.

  78. BJ says:

    @Anonymous Reader

    ““Look at the rest of his work”, again?”

    Yes, it a mark of intellectual integrity to be diligent in properly understanding those you critique.

    “It is obvious that Wilson, like Oprah, is all about women’s feeeeelz as the most important thing in a marriage.”

    If you would take the time to read even a bit more of Wilson, you would see that what you say here is untrue. His statements in Reforming Marriage are wrong and I disagree with his assessment, but it is part and parcel of a larger body of work. Ignoring that is intellectual dishonesty. It is what feminists do. They take their emotion over one statement and refuse to look logically at the rest of the work.

    “What that should do is cause greater scrutiny of all the rest of his work because he has a fundamental error in his thinking. He gets a very basic thing completely wrong: feelz over logic. What else does he get wrong?”

    I couldn’t agree more. But that means we have to take the other things he wrote seriously. We can’t say he wrote one stupid thing, and dismiss him as Oprah. That is a very anti-intellectual position to take. That is my main concern in this thread.

  79. BJ says:

    @Dalrock

    Once again, thank you for taking the time to respond.

    Your explanation is greatly appreciated. I don’t fundamentally disagree with your assessment. My intent was merely to advise caution in linking Wilson with Oprah. The gap is simply too big and it leads your readers to see him as a Satanic influence. If he is as evil as some of your readers assume, then I would simply ask who you think is doing it correctly in ministry. Not some keyboard captain blogger, but an actual on the ground minister, marrying people and growing a community of the faithful.

    It was admittedly unsolicited advise, so heed it or don’t. But please know that it comes from one who appreciates your writings and is working to implement biblical standards of marriage in ministry in the lives of real people. For me, this is not merely an academic exercise or a way of making money by pushing clicks and views.

    Blessings.

  80. Dalrock says:

    @BJ

    I couldn’t agree more. But that means we have to take the other things he wrote seriously. We can’t say he wrote one stupid thing, and dismiss him as Oprah. That is a very anti-intellectual position to take. That is my main concern in this thread.

    This was in response to Anon Reader, but I want to use it as an opportunity to expand on one other point (I’ve already covered why I referred to Oprah). There is more that is seriously wrong with Reforming Marriage. This may not be the worst, but what comes to the top of my mind is Wilson’s repeated pattern of blaming men when women sin. I touched on this regarding women’s sexuality in a previous post, but I could do a lengthy post with a slew of other truly astounding quotes demonstrating this. If you’ve read the book then I’m guessing you already know what I mean. This same pattern is easy to spot in his blog too. If it were any other writer than Wilson, I would have already covered it. But Wilson is unique. Any and every critique brings out a series of complaints that you can’t critique him based on what he writes, because he isn’t a good writer. And besides, you can’t read his work like a normal man’s work, because it is like Scripture. Plus, look, a squirrel (changing the subject to some other work of his). It isn’t even that the other work being offered as a defense is likely any better; I dig in on the work in question to avoid falling for the distraction. So I keep bringing the topic back away from the distraction, and then I’m accused of only looking at one part of his work. I’m happy to look at more (later), but I won’t play the game where each time we look at one piece we need to drop everything and look at another. This is an endless shell game.

  81. Anonymous Reader says:

    Minesweeper
    “Why Millennial Women Want to Date Older Men”

    This is easy to confirm, through The Glasses anywhere around a college campus. It can be seen in larger (200+) curches. It’s one reason why I keep pushing on 20-something men to read various sites and sources, because the women in their cohort are really hungry. That’s the reality, no matter how many “oughtas!” men over 40 want to dish out.

    Don’t like lotsa words?
    Search YouTube for the rock music video: “Guys My Age” by the band “Hey, Violet”. View all the way to the end for the full dose of reality in artistic form. Yes, girls are like that.

  82. There’s a distinct arome alright. It’s emanating from the general direction of Wilson and it reminds me of cow barn.

  83. Minesweeper says:

    @earl says:”Heaven forbid a woman has to sacrifice anything. She’s been told since she was 3 she could have it all.”

    they have made their bed earl, now lets see just how much they like lying in it. Not that I’ve partaken, but it really is weird to have girls half your age hit on you. They are attractive, but you know it leads to ruin.

    What’s even worse is the unattached women mid-late 30’s who are like “exocet missiles” when they discover a unattached male in their vicinity. It really has to be experienced to be believed. Their behaviour is unfortunately almost comical, as they have never had to initiate relationships in their life, now they are trying to learn at this stage – desperately, but all credit to them, they generally do end up with a guy quite quickly when they start going for it, even with their clumsiness – there is always someone who will wife them up.

  84. Anonymous Reader says:

    I wrote:
    “It is obvious that Wilson, like Oprah, is all about women’s feeeeelz as the most important thing in a marriage.”

    BJ
    If you would take the time to read even a bit more of Wilson, you would see that what you say here is untrue.

    I can’t know how long you have been reading this site, but even just in the last two weeks there has been enough electron spillage to falsify this statement. Dalrock and various members of his commentariat have been chewing on Wilson’s texts (that’s plural, not singular) for years. Both books and blog postings have been analyzed, and time after time after time it can be easily seen that Doug Wilson regards women’s feelings as very, very important. More important than any rational thought a woman’s husband might have. It is not “just one passage”, it’s multiple examples.

    Wilson isn’t the only celeb-preacher who caters to women’s feelz. He’s just the one we are analyzing at this time. If you’ve been reading here for a while, you should recall similar analysis of Matt Chandler, John Piper, Tim Keller and others.

    Truth or women’s feelings: choose one.

  85. Anonymous Reader says:

    BJ to Dalrock
    My intent was merely to advise caution in linking Wilson with Oprah.

    In other words, you are offended by reality. What should you do?

    […]

    I would simply ask who you think is doing it correctly in ministry. Not some keyboard captain blogger, but an actual on the ground minister, marrying people and growing a community of the faithful.

    That question has been kicked around for years. Perhaps you could contribute a few words of your own on the topic? What does “doing it correctly in ministry” look like on the actual ground, to you? What does a church that actively opposes frivorce look like, to pick one example?

    It was admittedly unsolicited advise, so heed it or don’t. But please know that it comes from one who appreciates your writings and is working to implement biblical standards of marriage in ministry in the lives of real people. For me, this is not merely an academic exercise or a way of making money by pushing clicks and views

    It’s not an academic exercise for the majority of men here. How many of your friends have been frivorced? How many men do you know of who have killed themselves in a moment of despair over being betrayed by their “till death do us part” wife? How many men do you personally know living a life of quiet desperation with a wife who is perpetually angry / passive aggressive / “not haaaaapy”, and no matter what they do nothing fixes the problem?

    This is part of the androsphere, the manosphere. Many men have wound up on sites like this out of sheer desperation, because nobody – especially not anyone in any church – can explain to them why their marriage or LTR is crumbling. There are men who are alive today, who decided not to kill themselves, because of sites like this.

    It is not about clicks and views. It is about throwing a lifeline to men drowning in the sewer of feminism.

  86. Gunner Q says:

    BJ @ 3:19 pm:
    “I don’t fundamentally disagree with your assessment. My intent was merely to advise caution in linking Wilson with Oprah. The gap is simply too big and it leads your readers to see him as a Satanic influence.”

    We aren’t wrong but we’re hurting Wilson’s reputation? Perhaps he really is running a personality cult.

  87. Gary Eden says:

    When I watch video’s like this I am all the more disgusted by the churchian ilk like Wilson. You could fill a stadium with churchian pastors and they wouldn’t have had the same positive benefit as this one man in the last 18 months.

    And he does it without Jesus. But he has love. And that is more than so many pastors.

  88. vfm7916 says:

    “My intent was merely to advise caution in linking Wilson with Oprah. The gap is simply too big and it leads your readers to see him as a Satanic influence. If he is as evil as some of your readers assume, then I would simply ask who you think is doing it correctly in ministry.* Not some keyboard captain blogger**, but an actual on the ground minister, marrying people and growing a community of the faithful.***”

    (I’m not worthy to fisk this properly, so i’m going to do this poorly. Mod me if this is inappropriate, Dalrock.)

    *if no one’s doing it right, then don’t criticize Wilson.
    **if keyboard captain blogger, then all statements invalid.
    ***You are not fit to question one word because SQUIRREL

    “It was admittedly unsolicited advise, so heed it or don’t.* But please know that it comes from one who appreciates your writings and is working to implement biblical standards of marriage in ministry in the lives of real people.** For me, this is not merely an academic exercise or a way of making money by pushing clicks and views.***”

    *OBEY FEEBLE MORTAL
    **I do the same stuff so don’t make me feel all this CogDis please.
    ***I assume Dalrock is obviously monetizing all this! Or he/it is just doing it for lulz! Don’t look that Wilson makes $$$ from books/seminars/etc! Totes not the same thing!

  89. da GBFM zlzoolzlzzlzozlzloozozo says:

    While Wilson and the Chaplain in the story below do sometimes stray from God, they are yet worthy ministers of the Word, mostly:
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/04/04/navy-chaplain-career-fired-sex-tavern-video-new-orleans/486259002/

  90. 7817 says:

    @BJ
    “My intent was merely to advise caution in linking Wilson with Oprah. The gap is simply too big and it leads your readers to see him as a Satanic influence.”

    Don’t get your panties in a wad.

    Even Jesus told Peter to “get behind me, Satan.”

    Calling out error is a good thing. Repentance is the goal. If Wilson and his supporters see that they have become deluded by the culture about feminism and turn away from it, so much the better. Till then, truth is truth and should be told.

    It’s not nice to allow people to continue in something they are deluded in without exposing the lie, so they have opportunity to turn away.

    I don’t know Dalrock, but these posts of his are love in action. Calling out error so someone can turn from it is a very loving thing to do. Not nice, but love all the same.

  91. Minesweeper says:

    @gary eden,

    does JP do it without Jesus ? he is prob more Christian than many who consider themselves so.

    He maybe not spirit filled as pentecostals or charismatics (like myself) are used too, but he was brought up in a church, refuses the monotony and ruin of the established church, he identifies as a Christian.

    I for one, think he is a man for the ages. And particularly, for this age. He is a man who is head and shoulders above all else (on the international circuit of opinion).

    I doubt he couldn’t be a Christian, why would you fight against the demonic tyranny as he is doing, without God backing you ?

  92. Frank K says:

    Because like many Protestant evangelicals, he has written several books on men, women, marriage, and family. By virtue of those writings he holds himself out as an expert on these subjects. He is a seminary trained minister and holds himself out as an expert on theology, and its intersection with marriage and family life.

    Hmmm … he still seems like a nobody. Is he quoted by most Evang pastors the way Dobson is?

  93. Gary Eden says:

    @minesweeper

    does JP do it without Jesus ? he is prob more Christian than many who consider themselves so.

    He is giving the Christian message, but without Christ. He uses the language of Jung and psychology and science to teach a very similar message.

    Now is that brilliance, because he disarms peoples defensiveness against religion, and many end up following Christ anyway? Or is it damnable because he’s co-opted the message and points people to psychology and science instead of to Christ?

    I don’t know. For now I’m taking a ‘he who is not against us is for us’ approach in light of the good he is doing. My beef isn’t with Peterson, its with the women worshipping churchian pastors leading the flock astray.

  94. Minesweeper says:

    @gary eden, he is not preaching the gospel directly, but so what ? Who is doing more in this age ?

    I’d rather share a pint with JP than ANY of the mega church or well known “pastors”. And I’d reckon, Jesus would too.

  95. earl says:

    Their behaviour is unfortunately almost comical, as they have never had to initiate relationships in their life, now they are trying to learn at this stage – desperately, but all credit to them, they generally do end up with a guy quite quickly when they start going for it, even with their clumsiness – there is always someone who will wife them up.

    If they find the right guy who’s been ignored by women his whole life the flattery would probably be enough to delude him.

    Nevermind he has to overlook all the butthexings she went through and the debt she’s built up in her ‘wild’ years.

  96. earl says:

    . Calling out error so someone can turn from it is a very loving thing to do. Not nice, but love all the same.

    Christian men weren’t meant to be ‘nice’.

  97. BJ says:

    @Dalrock

    I must say that I never expected this much interaction. I have been reading sporadically for several weeks, but rarely get into the comments. Just know that I really am grateful.

    First off, I am not some kind of Wilson apologist. I do appreciate his writings, especially his theological insights, but I don’t claim to agree with his every word. Plus, I won’t say that we can’t look at his writings, because he isn’t a good writer. He is a good writer. Finally, I haven’t read Reforming Marriage. I have it on my book shelf at church, but haven’t read it.

    The only narrow point I was making is that I fear it hurts your credibility when you link two radically differing people and claim they are all the same. It makes you easy to dismiss out of hand. “Darock thinks a theocrat like Wilson who refuses to ordain women and believes women should stay at home and have babies is a feminist?” Take heed or don’t, but from an outsiders point of view, it feels ludicrous.

    Again, I appreciate your explanation, and the point you are highlighting is important. But it feels like hyperbole to me. One has built an empire by destroying western civilization, and one has built a modest community that you would be hard pressed to find better exemplifies the types of marriages you promote. They simply are not the same. How many unjustified divorces is Oprah responsible for? How many of them have happened in Wilson’s church? That answer speaks volumes.

    Thanks, again.

  98. Eidolon says:

    @BJ

    I don’t get this “you can’t call X wrong unless you can find someone who’s right” idea. Here’s an example.

    An influential scientific paper is written which demonstrates that some scientific variable has the value of X, and many other papers and experiments are based on it and its conclusion.

    Research Joe notes that it doesn’t seem like the results flowing from this paper are very effective or good. He decides to look at the paper itself and check its logic and conclusions.

    Joe finds that the paper’s logic is faulty and its conclusions are invalid. He conclusively proves that the paper’s conclusion that the variable has the value of X is incorrect, because a) its logic does not follow correctly and b) when measured, the variable does not (or does not consistently) have the value of X.

    Joe hasn’t discovered the actual value of the variable. Has Joe contributed something of value?

    Yes, very much so — he has shown that a particular conclusion about the value is wrong, and thus that other research based on that conclusion should be thrown out and/or reevaluated and no one should use that conclusion anymore. This is very valuable in itself.

    It’s simply absurd to say that disproving a wrong conclusion or showing that a particular person or group’s theology is faulty is invalid if you don’t have a complete solution to replace it with. “Stay away from Doug Wilson” is not an incomplete statement if it doesn’t also include “…and listen to so-and-so instead.”

  99. 7817 says:

    This is from a comment at Wilson’s blog:

    As a thought experiment, let’s change a few words in the quoted passages to give us a different perspective. We are told in the Bible that husbands are to love their wives as Christ loves the church, after all.

    “The health of all other relationships in the home depends upon the health of this relationship, and the key is found in how God is treating his people. Or, put another way, when mamma ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy.”

    “… my operating assumption is always that God is completely responsible for all the problems. Some may be inclined to react negatively to this, but it is important to note that responsibility is not the same thing as guilt. If a christian has been unfaithful to God, of course they bear the guilt of their unfaithfulness. But at the same time, God is responsible for it.”

  100. earl says:

    Now is that brilliance, because he disarms peoples defensiveness against religion, and many end up following Christ anyway? Or is it damnable because he’s co-opted the message and points people to psychology and science instead of to Christ?

    I don’t know. For now I’m taking a ‘he who is not against us is for us’ approach in light of the good he is doing. My beef isn’t with Peterson, its with the women worshipping churchian pastors leading the flock astray.

    It is important to find out that unlike the lies you hear…science and faith are not opposed to each other. When you get down to it science is the process of discovering natural truths…when you do that eventually you start discovering truth itself.

  101. Hmm says:

    I re-read Wilson’s aroma passage, and need to be more specific about the danger there.

    Something of what he says is true: that there’s a sort of aroma coming from God’s love in a Godly home. In the homes of some friends I have felt it almost as a palpable presence. And I’ve never felt the same thing in an unbelieving home.

    So I think Wilson is descriptively spot on in the positive sense. But where this all goes wonky is in any consideration that the lack of such an aroma indicates something tangible about the household or its faithfulness. To do that is tantamount to judging people (and mainly the husband in Wilson’s text) by feelz. Two people can visit the same home or talk to the same person and come away with vastly different ideas of who they are and what is important to them.

    When you read Galatians 5 about the works of the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit, Paul is clear that the works of the flesh are outward, visible: “Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these.” [19-21A] The fruit of the Spirit is inward, invisible: “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.} [22-23] There can be no law about such things because they cannot be seen.

    So any claim that an outwardly obedient man (no visible works of the flesh) who doesn’t have a happy home must be a hypocrite is an egregious breach of Biblical teaching – a claim to have the knowledge of God himself.

  102. freebird says:

    I could name at least two pastors that are doing it right.
    Another posthumously.
    But they have been branded supremacists and hate mongers for teaching the word as written.
    All of them have (or had) open meetings with mixed race in attendance.
    There is a real push to silence anyone preaching The Gospel as written.
    I damn well guarantee those three men not named are more intelligent,more honest,and more educated than any Mega rockstar dollarbuddy feministing marxist subjugating pastor you see or hear..

  103. Minesweeper says:

    earl says:” It is important to find out that unlike the lies you hear…science and faith are not opposed to each other. When you get down to it science is the process of discovering natural truths…when you do that eventually you start discovering truth itself.”

    true, but science has morphed itself in “the” religion of this age. its the golden cow, they worship science/medicine and never God.

    little do they know, they are setting themselves in God sight-hairs for a take down, by this I mean he usually lets society destroy itself and return to him.

  104. Spike says:

    Earl:
    ”It is important to find out that unlike the lies you hear…science and faith are not opposed to each other. When you get down to it science is the process of discovering natural truths…when you do that eventually you start discovering truth itself.”

    -Never a better word has been spoken, Brother! -and I mean that in all sincerity.

    Years ago. in the depths of Blue-Pill induced depression, I came to understand that I needed to return to the Lord after a decade of atheism. As a scientist, I resolved that there is only one type of truth – absolute consistency between the claimed and the observed.
    I went through all of science – cosmology, physics, biological evolution, and then began piecing together what the Bible said in the light of our scientific knowledge.
    I found that the old testament is the only ancient scripture compatible with established science. it isn’t complete, but its’ sufficient and a better pointer than anything else in the ancient world.
    I came out of this period with a faith founded on established truth. I still suffered depression (or more accurately, Mixed Mood Disorder with Escalating Suicidal Ideation) and anxiety, but it ebbed away the more I exercised my brain power and ”rendered every thought captive”. I also solved my marital conflict in the process as a by-product of a better state of mind.

  105. freebird says:

    Joy Behar of “The View” said Christianity was akin to a mental disease.
    Oh BOY did that get her in trouble when the big brass came after her.
    Not because she said the wrong thing,but because people with power took offense.
    This is the same with men that actually preach from the Word,they are branded with the stigma
    of alleged mental instability and a derogatory take-down measure.
    Turn about is fair play,Joy Behar and Wilson would castrate men away from any authority at all and call it “good and fair, Godly even.”
    Which tongue are YOU babbling in,secular pleasure, or Godly adherence?

  106. shmohawk1 says:

    “Finally Wilson comes along and explains why she feels this way. It is because her husband is a hypocrite. Sure he does everything he is told to do, but he is a fraud, and God is using her feelings of discontentment to show the world the truth!”

    LOL. This is EXACTLY what my wife said, and was affirmed in by our marriage counselor. The day after a huge argument, in which she declined to affirm her marriage vows, I changed the oil in her car and bought her flowers. But rather than this being evidence that I was trying hard to be a good husband and do the right thing … it was evidence that I was not being “real” and “authentic.”

  107. BJ says:

    @Anonymous Reader

    I am actually very glad that men who have been destroyed by the atrocity that is our current marriage legal system have a place to come for support. I am always concerned about the possibility of these groups engendering bitterness among the ranks, but for men to have a place to come and find out that they aren’t alone, and that not everyone supports women screwing men over is a good thing.

    But providing an online forum and building a religious community that exemplifies the values of marriage in the bible is two very different things. One allows ideas and support in a safe environment, while the other requires putting those ideas into practice in the lives of people who hear you preach each week.

    “Perhaps you could contribute a few words of your own on the topic? What does “doing it correctly in ministry” look like on the actual ground, to you? What does a church that actively opposes frivorce look like, to pick one example?”

    I don’t claim to have all the answers, but in our ministry marriages and children are central. I would point to ministries like Voddie Baucham, RC Sproul, and Alistair Begg. They have all built very large, faithful communities of believers who practice god-honoring marriages and families. What does it look like? Supporting the father as the head of the house. Teaching women about Titus 2 and their very important role of motherhood. Opposing sin in all of its facets in marriage, such as adultery, pornography, rebellion against headship, abdication of leadership, involuntary celibacy, etc. We would resist divorce strongly, and we would bar folk from the Table if they were unrepentant. That’s a broad sweep, but that was my main thrust.

  108. BJ says:

    @Gunner Q

    “We aren’t wrong but we’re hurting Wilson’s reputation? Perhaps he really is running a personality cult.”

    You don’t seem to have any grasp of my point if you think this was what I was saying.

  109. BJ says:

    @Eidolon

    “I don’t get this “you can’t call X wrong unless you can find someone who’s right” idea. Here’s an example.”

    I didn’t say one couldn’t do what you explain in your post. That is of course very valid. What you can’t do is say that(A) X experiment is wrong and (B) the conclusions that follow from it are invalid, therefore (C) everything the scientist has done in his career is invalid. It certainty should be in question, no doubt, subject to scrutiny, of course, but not invalid. Wilson is right on so many things, and Oprah is wrong about everything more or less. To conclude that one is like the other is invalid thinking.

    But my point about who is doing it right in ministry goes further. If someone has built a religious community filled with marriages and families that exemplify what Dalrock puts forward here, and many of the problems of out secular feminist age do not exist there, then we have to admit some degree of success, and be honest about that. His writings are very much up for criticism, but results matter, too. How many frivolous divorces do you know of that have come out of his community? Actions speak louder than words.

  110. Swanny River says:

    To long-timers here, what is up with the BJs of the world so fretful of “balance?”
    How about praying for Dalrock’s holiness instead of derailing a post over balance? A new commenter shows up here every few weeks fighting tooth and nail, but always fall back to an assertion of wanting balance. The first time I remember it was Liz about Hagemi. The Wilson posts have brought several people needing to bring balance. BJ, so what is your fear if YOU don’t post “to provide balance?” I’m really curious about this because I think the entire complementarian movement is based on a very similar, triangulation motivation. What makes you think balance instead of zeal is being called for?
    If it was me, I would just say to a blogger, “I disagree.” I don’t understand this “concern” for balance. Is an Olympic panel judging blogs, and you think your effort will push Dalrock’s score a couple of tenths?

  111. BJ says:

    @7817

    Totally agree with your post. Truth is good and subjecting everyone to scrutiny is healthy.

    Perhaps I was clumsy with my words, so no panty wadding on my end, but my concern is that failing to make obvious distinctions in degree makes it easy to dismiss someone like Dalrock. Wilson is not Oprah. Both can be wrong about the same thing, but one is clearly worse for our culture than the other.

  112. Bee says:

    BJ,

    Here is another Doug Wilson article to consider:

    https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/on-why-christian-women-are-prettier.html

    Wilson inverts clear teaching in I Cor. 11 to try to make women not feel bad about the truth that they are different from men. Men are the glory of God, but women are the glory of man.

    He also repeats the lame feminist idea that since Eve was created after Adam she is superior. This is wrong doctrine because it undercuts the principle that Jesus is preeminent, like Adam, since he is first born of creation.

    This whole article is bad doctrine.

    Hat tip to Darwinian Armenian to linking to this several days ago.

  113. BJ says:

    @ Swanny River

    Fretful? No. Just interested in conversation on a topic that relates to my life’s work.

    “BJ, so what is your fear if YOU don’t post “to provide balance?” I’m really curious about this because I think the entire complementarian movement is based on a very similar, triangulation motivation. What makes you think balance instead of zeal is being called for?”

    I am not fearful of anything, but there are two things that come to mind. I have folk in my church that read blogs like this one and I don’t want them to dismiss Dalrock out of hand for saying something like Wilson equals Oprah, especially when they know better. Secondly, there are ditches on both sides of the road. Balance matters.

  114. seventiesjason says:

    “in our ministry marriages and children are central”

    You just eliminated a HUGE swath of the world that needs Christ. Men. Single men. Since I was a boy in the 1970’s, teen in the 1980’s……..young man in the 1990’s and since 2009 being born again in Christ…and being involved……..everything in ministry is “central” to “marriages and children”

    The church has talked this to death.

    Has stated this to death

    Yet…marriage is still declining. Men like myself who WANT to be married and be a part of this “clique” of the church where “marriages and children are central” are told to man-up / move out the basement / get a real job / grow up / be a man are actually really tired of it. WOmen today in church just have to “show up” and men need all the “fixing” and must “learn Game” or whetever the flavor-of-the-month term is. Men need accountablity. Need to submit more. Need to do this. Need to do that.

    Single men in the church are tired of “marriages and children being central” and shamed or even viewed as “not as christian” or “still need to work on their sin” and are not even trusted to lead because they are not married. This is why they leave. This is why too many single men the world, right now want nothing to do with “church” because “marriages and children are central” (though the stats show the that the children ditch and leave the second they leave the house at 18 for the most part). Divorce inside the church is only a few paltry points lower than the secular world. Pastors hail this as a “victory” and a reason why people should come to church…….instead of coming to Christ……..

    The ministry of Christ is out in the streets…..and I fight these battles there, but turning church into a club and ministry focus keeps many out and many frustrated.

    Any church that says “marriages and children are central” I stay away from. A church that says “come, taste, see and believe” I will darken the door of

  115. 7817 says:

    @BJ:

    Promotion of woman worship from Wilson is actually worse than Oprah’s feminism, because Oprah is not supposed to be telling the truth from the Bible like Wilson is.

    If there is any similarity in their position, it’s worse for Wilson than for Oprah.

    Dalrock’s posts have been taking Wilson’s quotes and showing how Wilson talks out of both sides of his mouth on the issue, but his prescriptive advice is for men to create a happy home, and that that is not possible without them making their wife happy, which sounds eerily similar to Oprah.

  116. seventiesjason says:

    If you are bold enough to reply…I’ll check back in a few hours. RIght now I have to still don a Salvation Army Uniform (not much longer….about a week), hit SE Fresno in the alleys, storm drains, and overpasses to listen, pray, talk to…..listen. listen. empathize. Guide to services. Pray. Pray. Listen. The stentch will be overpowering. I may be spit on (happens), and be cursed. But I also have people cry. Talk. Pray with me. I want the Church of Jesus Christ when MEN bathed in the Holy Ghost with expectation heal the sick. Break the chains. Ease the yolk. Bright light into darkness

    Good day!

  117. Swanny River says:

    I disagree about balance because the culture is so feminized. Your idea of balance could seem like a lack of fight. Again, this idea of wise overseer seems so common to people in ministry. It is very discouraging to me. My question remains, what if zeal is needed, not a wordly and superficial case of “yea-buts?” Your sense of balance has an aroma of lukewarmness to me. How is that for a Wilsonian phrase? My church counselor says he doesn’t talk about women’s rebelliousness much because he sees men being 5he problem about half the time. There is that 50-50 balance. I’d say his balance is skewed and is because he is fearful of taking up the fight.

  118. BJ says:

    @Bee

    Thanks for the link. I actually think this is a good example of what I have been trying to get at today.

    I don’t see exactly what you mean by him inverting the passage, but for the sake of time, I will take your word that he has done just that very thing. Let’s say that he has mangled the text of Scripture, and we think that he has nefarious or cowardly motives for doing so. Can we not at this point say that even with this criticism in plain view that his bigger point is still worth considering?

    I don’t know about you but the tenets of feminism are making women down right ugly. Promotion of being fat, destroying objective standards of beauty, drug and alcohol abuse, and the promotion of cross-dressing are all taking their effects on the beauty of secular feminists. But if women take the teachings of Scripture seriously, and avoid slutty behavior, will they not be prettier? There is a reason PUAs lurk among the church girls.

    Wilson is very much worth criticizing at times, but this is the type of article that never gets written by the Oprahs of the world.

  119. Sharkly says:

    BJ,
    I hear your questions. Here are some answers.
    Yes those who teach false things contrary to God’s word, are in fact working against the kingdom of God, and are on Satan’s side in those areas of error, or deceit.
    Yes many, many, many men are the victims of a Feminist assault on God’s design of patriarchy. Many of them come to this site. I my self am going through a mess right now. The “church” has been worse than impotent. The “church” has emboldened my wife’s rebellion, dishonored me unnecessarily in front of my already insolent wife, encouraged her to deny me forgiveness while calling me unforgiving if I try to point out her sin, and directly encouraged her to indulge her addiction to avoiding intimacy. It is next to impossible to find a “minister” with the spiritually descended testicles to say any word to my wife holding her accountable to what the Bible plainly says. Please pray for my family, for the sake of the name of Jesus. Seriously! I’ve got two son’s who’s family is being torn apart in the most horrendous way because these hirelings won’t lift a finger to help with the burden, they heaped on me, of a wife they encouraged toward rebellion. Please pray for my family to be spared from the Satanic fruit of these false teachers, and the Father of Lies & deceit, who pushes impressionable women to follow their naturally sinful feelings.
    As to who is doing it right, there is none good but God! Read His Word. Follow His Son. And forsake not the fellowship freely available here at places like Dalrock’s Blog. “church” has contributed to the downfall of my marriage. If I had not taken my wife to “church” right now she would probably still be under the false impression that the “church” was still against frivorce. But I thought I should go, and they let her know that women can do no wrong, except picking a bad husband, but the church will forgive them for that, and help them get a replacement chump.

  120. Bee says:

    Jason,

    “I want the Church of Jesus Christ when MEN bathed in the Holy Ghost with expectation heal the sick. Break the chains.”

    Watch this series if you want to learn about healing the sick and casting out demons:

  121. BJ says:

    @seventiesjason

    Thanks for the reply.

    I am sympathetic to your position, especially given the horrific state of marriage. But I will stand by my claim that marriages and family is central.

    Firstly, the family is the means by which God ordained that his covenant would be passed. Starting with Abraham, we are command to teach the faith through our children. Secondly, strong marriages are the most important institution for a healthy society. Societies with too many unmarried men become unstable and chaotic. It is the greatest protection against poverty, as well as anti-social behavior among men. If we take the bible seriously about sexual ethics, marriage is also the only viable option as a sexual outlet. Celibates are certainly possible, but not in great numbers among the wider culture. A culture with too many celibates is also a problem. Finally, and most importantly, the birth rate of a culture is the key factor in its preservation. Europe will soon be Islamic, because of birth rates. Israel will continue to become more extreme in its orthodoxy, because the orthodox have like 10 kids, but secular Jews have like 1.5 kids. I could provide other examples, but without a majority of the community being married, the community risks losing its identity and being absorbed by others.

    Single men have been ostracized by the church, not because we focus on marriage and children, but because we have taken away their rightful place as head of the household.

    Blessings in your work.

  122. BJ says:

    @Swanny River

    Thank you for your response. I hear your advice, and will heed it. Perhaps you are right that I need to be more zealous. “Zeal for your house has consumed me” and all that.

    And, yes, that was very much a Wilson-like phrase.

  123. Swanny River says:

    BJ, your Mr. Rogers marketing is perfect for ministry but I don’t say that as a good thing. You ask about us being unable to let go of a heresy so that we can agree on a different point. You are enabling Wilson. Why can’t he say the good part and correct the wrong? But you are trying to do that with Dalrock but excusing it for Wilson. How will Wilson see his error if we only blog to do back slapping for what we agree with? After all, you are writing because you disagree with something written on a blog.

  124. Swanny River says:

    Thanks for a good response BJ. May God bless you. I see balance being valuable in Ecclesiastes and a few Proverbs, but zeal being more exalted. However, in the church, it is the opposite, especially in a church in a university town, like I’m in.

  125. BJ says:

    @Sharkly

    ” Please pray for my family, for the sake of the name of Jesus. Seriously! I’ve got two son’s who’s family is being torn apart in the most horrendous way because these hirelings won’t lift a finger to help with the burden, they heaped on me, of a wife they encouraged toward rebellion. Please pray for my family to be spared from the Satanic fruit of these false teachers, and the Father of Lies & deceit, who pushes impressionable women to follow their naturally sinful feelings.”

    Absolutely, I will pray for you. I am sorry to hear about this situation. I have seen this movie too many times, so I will pray for her repentance.

    I am relatively new to ministry (less than two years), but rest assured not everyone takes that approach in ministry.

  126. Bee says:

    BJ,

    “Can we not at this point say that even with this criticism in plain view that his bigger point is still worth considering?”

    You seem to be saying, “that the ends justify the means”. You are saying that if Doug Wilson inverts an important Bible doctrine in order that Christian women emphasize beauty that is a good thing.

    It’s another example of women’s feelings being more important than a key Biblical truth – the truth that women are not the glory of God, they are the glory of man. Woman was created for the sake of the man.

  127. BJ says:

    @Swanny River

    I appreciate the encouragement.

    I actually have sparred with Wilson on his blog. When he opposed punishing women who get abortion, I lost my mind. His inclination toward open borders (libertarian style) makes me crazy.

    To all, thanks for tolerating me this evening. This was my first venture into the comments sections. Thanks for the interaction. Blessings.

  128. Swanny River says:

    BJ, your response to us this night could be a model for how we wish Wilson would respond. Good on you man!

  129. Lost Patrol says:

    @BJ

    I will venture that most men here have not seen what you describe:

    What does it look like? Supporting the father as the head of the house. Teaching women about Titus 2 and their very important role of motherhood. Opposing sin in all of its facets in marriage, such as adultery, pornography, rebellion against headship, abdication of leadership, involuntary celibacy, etc. We would resist divorce strongly, and we would bar folk from the Table if they were unrepentant.

    In my experience, all these things arrive with caveats if they are addressed at all. You portray a place many of us are looking for, so I hope you will stay engaged here.

    I have never worked at ministry in the way that you apparently do. In my opinion your perspective is valuable and I appreciate your participation in the comments. I think you have made reasonable points that very much remind me of my own views when I was a new arrival to the Dalrock site; but which have evolved as I continued to peruse the posts and comments over time, comparing them to what I had seen and lived and been for so many decades. Your statement here is key:

    I have been reading sporadically for several weeks, but rarely get into the comments.

    I encourage you to take the deep dive. You strike me as a man interested in truth. Here you may find some unvarnished (maybe uncomfortable )truth that will not be heard via other means. The commenters are witnesses and participants in stories that often don’t get told elsewhere. By now you see that the posts are thought provoking (these latest having provoked your own) and bring forward ideas that are not welcome in our current politically correct and feminist culture.

    Among the commenters there appears broad expertise across a variety of professions, trades, walks of life, and lived experiences. They represent various faith traditions to include none at all, and there are men here with seminary training and/or extensive bible knowledge you can spar with. Take it all on board as you feel time permits. You will find things that your congregants will not say to you in your official role, but may be thinking, or at least grappling with in some confusion. It would be worth your time to see these different views, and for other men to have the benefit of your experiences working through these issues with people living them in real time.

    All of our conditioning was so protracted and subtle, that a man must make the conscious effort to examine himself in light of what is discussed here.

  130. Lost Patrol says:

    Ha! Everybody is writing to BJ while I’m still trying to type.

  131. Hose_B says:

    @FrankK
    Re….who is Wilson, why do we care, etc……

    Wilson is very big with the Southern Baptist Convention and FamilyLife. Along with Rainey, Dobson, Tripp, Lorrits, Piper, Grudem and others.
    I just finished a seven week series by Family Life called “the art of marriage”. It was filled with the same crap. EVERY scripted vignette ended with the man realizing his mistakes and apologizing. They call the woman’s feeling the “barometer” of the realationship several times. The session on sex NEVER EVEN MENTIONED 1 Corinth 7:5. When I asked about this, I was told I just didn’t understand. I’ve has several conversations one on one about this and have been repeatedly told I did not understand and that this was “Superb” material.
    Sigh. Guys like Wilson put this crap out there and the churchian organizations back them up as Gospel.

  132. Hose_B says:

    BJ,

    “Can we not at this point say that even with this criticism in plain view that his bigger point is still worth considering?”

    This is the same thing my pastors are telling me. Sure the material can be picked apart…..but think of the bigger point. Yeah, it might leave out huge bits of scripture, but it has SOME….so that’s good right? Don’t miss the bigger point.

    I’ve been told that a half truth is a whole lie. You cannot pick and choose scripture. It’s all or nothing.

  133. freebird says:

    Cudo to seventiesjason for takin it to the streets my brudda!
    One ensample of a man preaching correctly:
    The immortal,legendary,God’s angry man,Master theologian and supreme public speaker; I present to you (host willing) Dr Gene Scott on why the Resurrection message must be true.
    So fitting for Easter season.Talk about light a fire up in here.
    http://www.pastormelissascott.com.edgesuite.net/pdf/Resurrection.pdf

  134. Cane Caldo says:

    @BJ

    I am not fearful of anything, but there are two things that come to mind. I have folk in my church that read blogs like this one and I don’t want them to dismiss Dalrock out of hand for saying something like Wilson equals Oprah, especially when they know better.

    You are familiar with the “carrot and stick” approach, I assume. The carrot and the stick are two very different things, but they work together to move the animal in a certain direction. They are different

    I also assume that you are aware that a pair of pincers is two levers bent in opposing directions. but joined at a fulcrum so that the effect is to grasp a thing.

    Wilson and Oprah are like those things. They are different, but the direction and fulcrum of these tools are “Do whatever makes women happy”.

  135. Patrick says:

    The answer for Christian men is to find a Roman Catholic or Orthodox Church, preferably in a rural or exurban area, and ask the priest for Christian instruction. The non-denominational/ evangelical church movement is dying right before our eyes and can’t be revived. These churches are too connected to popular culture and “the world” to survive the current feminist, progressive, Marxist onslaught. Find a priest and church that faithfully adheres to Scripture and church tradition and dive into study of Christianity and the wealth of knowledge accumulated by the Church over centuries, but largely forgotten by evangelicals. It is the only way forward for men.

  136. Sharkly says:

    BJ and others,
    By the way, I’m not saying I have not sinned. I’m just saying that the “church” has taken away all the tools I might have used to restore my home to God’s intended design. Between the “church” and the state that is enabled by the votes of churchgoers, I have no leverage to turn my wife toward the right. And if I try, I’m manipulative, controlling, and a dictator. If I try to use conviction or shame, I’m verbally abusive. And unlike the fools who have their “churches” run into the ditches, I’ve confessed my sins, and repented. They just want me to repent of trying to be the head, and expecting sex from my wife, and of “beating her over the head with Bible verses”.

    Seriously they’re satanic false teachers, and the lake of fire is reserved for them, and as the smoke of their torment will rise up for ever and ever, I’ll be praising the holiness of the righteous God who has left them there, because they took their own names from the book of life.

    Those hirelings have plowed with my heifer, and I’m mad as hell! I pity their souls! I’d like to kill them for their treachery against God and myself. They’re thieves who take money given to God to pay their bills promising to teach His word, and then teach what is contrary to it. But they are not going to be objects of my physical wrath, because my God will be my vengeance, and He will see that those who persecute his servants and dishonor those who fear Him, will not escape His wrath. Amen and Amen! How long oh Lord?

    Psalm 69:26 For they persecute him whom thou hast smitten; and they talk to the grief of those whom thou hast wounded. 27 Add iniquity unto their iniquity: and let them not come into thy righteousness. 28 Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous. 29 But I am poor and sorrowful: let thy salvation, O God, set me up on high.

  137. earl says:

    They just want me to repent of trying to be the head, and expecting sex from my wife, and of “beating her over the head with Bible verses”.

    In other words they wanted you to repent from trying to make your marriage work.

    God set up the man as the head of marriage, sex is meant to be the renewal of wedding vows with the possibility of procreation, a good husband washes his wife in the Word so that she may be holy.

    And I liked it was brought up that women shouldn’t focus on happiness as their #1 goal but holiness.

  138. info says:

    @Patrick
    ”The answer for Christian men is to find a Roman Catholic or Orthodox Church, ”

    Disagree. There is still PCA churches out there that stand firm. And some KJV only churches that seem solid save for their stance on the KJV-only position.

  139. Coloradomtnman says:

    @BJ

    Sorry to let you in on the dirty little ‘secret’ but cucks, churchians and their traveling companions at modern evangelical haunts are a dying gutter religion. They are the vanguard of nothing and have compromised and capitulated every single truth and boundary for five decades. “Can’t we just compromise.” 🙂

    I laughed out loud when reading your comments and how you haven’t read the book but it’s on your bookshelf; a truer statement was never made by an evangelical in modern Amerika. They all have shelves of garbage they haven’t read, but the most legendary book they haven’t read is the Bible.

    May the dust settle deeply on your Dobson, Arterburn, Rainey, Baucham, Driscoll and Chandler collection of beta-cuck inducing garbage.

  140. okrahead says:

    Sharkly,
    Read the letters to the seven churches of Asia at the beginning of Revelation. Some of those churches were what you are dealing with; one even tolerated a woman teacher who lead others into adultery. Compare those churches to the church that was found faithful. Then find a church in your area that comes closest to the description of the faithful one in Revelation and start going there post haste. Take your wife with you if she will go; go without her if necessary. If you discover the leadership of your current congregation is as you describe then you have no good reason to stay and many sound reasons to leave.

  141. earl says:

    The church you want is the church that is faithful to the Lord Jesus Christ and preaches the Gospel. Not a church that rationalizes sin and preaches Marxism, social justice, feminism, or some zeitgeist ideology. They will die with the times.

  142. @BJ. Have you ever considered Matthew 18 in the Bible specifically as it relates to brotherly admonition? Does a brother need to offend and remain unrepentant in every way? In fact, remittance to heathen status does happen on a lack of repentence on solitary offenses.

    1 Cor 11:27-32 provides us a warning for not discerning the body of Christ properly. Mistaking the Book of Oprah for

  143. 2/2

    body of Christ would be a prime example of just such a consequence.

  144. Coloradomtnman:

    Why Baucham? I’ve always thought he is pretty sound.

  145. Paul says:

    @Sharkly

    I can deeply sympathize with you; I’m also struggling in my marriage. I first tested the waters before calling church leadership, and it is clear they would not call out sinful behavior of my wife who threatened with frivorce. From then on I have specifically AVOIDED to involve them. It’s deeply disappointing. I’m walking a thin line, with God’s help, but am very well aware I cannot control my wife’s decisions. Best I can do is trust in Jesus for everything, live a holy life, pray, and try to carefully guide my wife towards a more bible-oriented life. It took quite some time, but I’m seeing little improvements, day-by-day, followed by the occasional back-sliding. I’ve come to accept that it is not in my power to preserve my marriage, nor to improve it fully, and that I very well might go through the suffering of being divorced. I do not consider divorce as ending marriage, so for me that scenario would mean entering celibacy and living a single life until I or my wife dies, or until she would wish to reconcile. I’ve gone through all the emotions, including severe anger, but please, do not sin, and leave it to God.

    As for a broader perspective; Albert Mohler was right when calling divorce the evangelical scandal. It’s destroying families on a never-before-seen scale. It’s crippling the church, and destroying it.

    Mt 19:6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.

  146. Bee says:

    Paul,

    I will pray for you and your wife.

  147. Sharkly says:

    Thank you Paul,
    You are a good example and gave good advice.
    I don’t, however, think divorce destroying families is crippling and destroying the church. I think it is a heavily compromised and already destroyed church that results in a culture that tolerates feminism, reviling decent men in front of their rebellious wives, and cheering as their wives drag the family through the court system to inflict maximum hurt and extract the most stuff for oneself, indifferent of damaging the children’s lives. The same sick church will marry her off again to a new sucker, and let her get up and give a testimony that will turn the world’s stomach. The blind are leading, and they never see the heresy, nor do the deaf hear the Good Shepherd’s voice.

  148. voxofreason says:

    “I do not consider divorce as ending marriage, so for me that scenario would mean entering celibacy and living a single life until I or my wife dies, or until she would wish to reconcile. I’ve gone through all the emotions, including severe anger, but please, do not sin, and leave it to God.”

    Powerful testimony Paul I’ll pray that God will show you what to do. Just don’t blame yourself every marriage I seen that fell apart there was always one partner with the decency or heart if you will and the other had little to none and the latter usually is the woman, go figure.

    “While I was still searching but not finding- I found one upright man among a thousand, but not one upright woman among them all.” Ecclesiastes 7:28

  149. voxofreason says:

    “The same sick church will marry her off again to a new sucker, and let her get up and give a testimony that will turn the world’s stomach.”

    When I read your comment Sharkly I thought of this teaching I read before…

    “Verses 16-19, where this truth is developed, is a greatly misunderstood passage. The Searcher says:
    Be not righteous overmuch, and do not make yourself overwise; why should you destroy yourself? Be not wicked overmuch, neither be a fool; why should you die before your time? It is good that you should take hold of this, and from that withhold not your hand; for he who fears God shall come forth from them all. Wisdom gives strength to the wise man more than ten rulers that are in a city. (Ecclesiastes 7:16-19 RSV)
    That must be the favorite Scripture of many, because it seems to advocate moderation in both good and evil. The Searcher seems to be saying, “Do not be too righteous, and do not be too wicked either, but a little of both does not hurt.” We have all heard somebody say. “Religion is all right in its place, but don’t let it interfere with your pleasure.” Moderation in all things, in other words.
    In trying to understand this, however, we must notice very carefully what the Searcher is saying. The second verb of Verse 16, “Do not make yourself overwise,” is the key to understanding the verse. In grammar this is called a reflexive verb; that is why the word yourself is included there. What the Searcher is really saying is, “Do not be wise to yourself; do not be wise in your own eyes, in regard to your righteousness.”
    This is a warning against self-righteousness, and properly so. Self-righteousness is the attitude of people who regard themselves as righteous because of the things they do not do. That is, in my judgment, the curse of the church today. The New Testament calls this Pharisaism; the Searcher rightly labels it wickedness. In our studies in the book of Job we learned that wickedness is expressed not only by murder, thievery and sexual misconduct, but also by bigotry, racism, pompousness, cold disdain; by critical, judgmental attitudes, by harsh, sarcastic words, by vengeful and vindictive actions. The evangelical prig, male or female, is a wicked person!

    https://www.raystedman.org/old-testament/ecclesiastes/whoever-said-life-was-fair

  150. Paul says:

    @Sharkly : thanks for your kind words.

    “The same sick church will marry her off again to a new sucker, and let her get up and give a testimony that will turn the world’s stomach.”

    It is indeed sickening. They all will stare at you blankly if you bring up the words of Jesus:
    Luk 16:18 Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and *the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery*.

  151. ChristianCool says:

    If there is one thing Jesus truly, and I mean REALLY hated and condemned was HYPOCRISY!!! ❗ That is what Doug Wilson seems to do here: he speaks from both sides of his mouth. He, like the Pharisees before him, teach one thing in public and lives another.

    The evidence seems to be in Wilson’s own books, where he teaches men to be Beta and then talks all Alpha on his website. On one side, he tries to placate the Feminist “Christians” and on the other, he gives men little website pep-talks about being masculine leaders of their homes. *sigh*

    In the end, he satisfies no one and comes across as a hypocrite and a fraudster. -_-

    Good ol’ Doug reminds me a politician who spent most of her wealthy and pampered life, living in luxury residences in Chicago or New York City. She speaks east coast, northeastern-style English. Then during a campaign speech in The Deep South, she spoke as if she grew up in the Mississippi Delta region. 🙄

    https://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=UCyvyyo6dtQ

    😆

    “What haaaaaapen?!” lol

  152. Coloradomtnman says:

    @chokingonreadpills

    Good point on Baucham, I was listing out quickly the participants in Mark Driscoll’s ‘Stepping Up’ how to become a man series and he was a part of it. After that I never purchased or read his books, but he may very well be a quality man and leader.

    Guilty by association in this case I guess….

  153. BJ says:

    @Coloradomtnman

    I have to disagree with you that evangelicals are a dying gutter religion. Jesus had a few things to say about the gates of Hell not prevailing, and all that.

    I also find your logic about my not reading Reforming Marriage to be rather muddled. “He hasn’t read his copy of Wilson’s book, therefore he hasn’t read the Bible.” Perhaps you could think this one through a little more carefully.

    Finally, I despise Dobson. I am pretty ambivalent about Chandler, but when he came out in support of BLM, I wrote him off. Don’t know who Arterburn and Rainey are. I have a book from Driscoll in my heretics section. And I will defend Baucham. If he is, “beta-cuck inducing garbage,” then you stand alone is your definition of a true man. He is pretty awesome, and his community is pretty successful.

  154. RedPillPaul says:

    @BJ

    In response to your scale between oprah and wilson, you are right when you look through the microscope that the difference is lage and noticeable but the naked eye, its practically no different.

    Or another way to look at it through a Biblical parable, oprah is a nasty yeast infection and wilson, in your eyes, may be a fresh batch of dough, but he is infected with yeast, which is to be rejected according to Jesus, a little yeast works through the whole dough.

    That is why to a lot of us, your distinction is irrelevant to the big picture

  155. BJ says:

    @God is laughing

    “Have you ever considered Matthew 18 in the Bible specifically as it relates to brotherly admonition?”

    Yes, quite often.

    “Does a brother need to offend and remain unrepentant in every way? In fact, remittance to heathen status does happen on a lack of repentence on solitary offenses.”

    I am not sure exactly what you mean here, but the relationship in Matthew is one where a person is under the authority of elders. If someone is in sin against his brother, then the process plays out as explained. But we also have to be careful of expecting perfection. Folk learn slowly and building a body believers requires huge amounts of grace and forgiveness. Leaders obviously have a greater level of scrutiny, per James, but grace must reign nonetheless. If we expect perfect leaders and perfect churches, we become a denomination of one, and even that one is imperfect.

  156. BJ says:

    @RedPillPaul

    Duly noted.

    But I must say that unless that if we expect perfection from every leader, we end up alone. Find me any leader who is working to build a community of the faithful and I will find a flaw, either in teaching or practice, in due time. By your process of elimination, there will be no leaders.

    Besides, the yeast and the dough analogy in Scripture is talking about either (A) the yeast of the pharisees, per Matthew 16, meaning legalism, or (B) the yeast is the kingdom of heaven, per Matthew 13, meaning that the yeast is a good thing, growing until it fills the earth.

    I am not sure your application fits either of those passages, though I could be misunderstanding you.

  157. RedPillPaul says:

    @BJ

    It would fall under the “pharisee” catagory, which eould be the teaching of women’s feeealzzz is the ultimate authority.

    Please dont argue that it isnt legalism and say that the yeast example can only fall in the two categories you mentioned. Its looking through the microscope again.

    In regards to leadership, i think that we men should have our first love as Jesus (Trinity) and learn from his leadership by staying in his word. Jesus is the word of God. We should avoid what the Israelites durring Samuels did look for a human “king” and keep focused on our King of kings in heaven and ready and speed his arrival

  158. Coloradomtnman says:

    @BJ

    You’re conflating, which is a good debate tactic used by evangelicals!

    ‘@Coloradomtnman

    ‘I have to disagree with you that evangelicals are a dying gutter religion. Jesus had a few things to say about the gates of Hell not prevailing, and all that.’

    — Christianity is not dying, Christ will prevail. The scummy cucks in the typical evangelical church are not a part of that, and their synagogue will likely be crushed and broken into thousands of pieces. I hope I am here to see it.

    ‘I also find your logic about my not reading Reforming Marriage to be rather muddled. “He hasn’t read his copy of Wilson’s book, therefore he hasn’t read the Bible.” Perhaps you could think this one through a little more carefully.’

    — Didn’t say that, read it again. I was precise in my words because I have a long history of dealing with evangelicals and I know how they love to parse words, phrases, conflate, redirect, divert and gaslight. I didn’t say in my previous comments, I’m not attacking you and you may very well read your Bible regularly – it’s likely! – but many evangelicals don’t, they read Dobson and Driscoll *instead*. You can accept it as a good point, a generalization or dismiss it entirely – I don’t care.

    ‘Finally, I despise Dobson. I am pretty ambivalent about Chandler, but when he came out in support of BLM, I wrote him off. Don’t know who Arterburn and Rainey are. I have a book from Driscoll in my heretics section. And I will defend Baucham. If he is, “beta-cuck inducing garbage,” then you stand alone is your definition of a true man. He is pretty awesome, and his community is pretty successful.’

    — Man, don’t think you read my response regarding Stepping-Up, scroll up and try it again. If you work in a church and you don’t know who Dennis Rainey is you must live in Alaska. I already clarified my inclusion of Baucham to the list but nice try.

    I predict, you’re going to become a blog favorite in record time. 🙂

  159. DrTorch says:

    The answer for Christian men is to find a Roman Catholic Church

    Only if the question is, “How could you make things worse?”

  160. stickdude90 says:

    Wives, in the same way complain to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the unhappiness of their wives

    I Peter 3:1 (Doug Wilson Translation)

  161. He Who Usually Just Lurks says:

    BJ says:
    April 4, 2018 at 8:20 pm

    …I will stand by my claim that marriages and family is central.

    Firstly, the family is the means by which God ordained that his covenant would be passed.

    I’ll just leave these scriptures about teaching and preaching here:

    And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. – Matt 28: 18-20

    For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. – 1 Cor 1: 21

  162. ray says:

    da GBFM zlzoolzlzzlzozlzloozozo says:

    “April 4, 2018 at 11:59 am
    Who’s writing the right stuff?
    Dalrock is!
    The Bible is indeed there, but the proper and exalted transmission of the Spirit of the Law has ever relied on Dalrocks fighting for it.”
    __________

    Uhh . . . no. Just no.

    The ‘Spirit of the Law’ has not ‘ever relied on Dalrock”. To say the least. Dalrock’s been around a few decades. ‘Ever’ is somewhat longer.

    There might have been one or two folks in history who have exemplified and exalted the Spirit of the Law slightly better than Dalrock. Not to minimize whichever works done on his site ultimately are judged as good.

    I’ll just toss out a couple names that might serve as an introductory lesson to da GBFM, whose Scriptural ignorance is rivaled only by his ignorance of the Spirit:

    1) Christ Jesus
    2) Abraham
    3) Moses

    Obviously could go on, no need. Point being, GBFM, you’re kind of a simpering toady, aintcha? Mebbe you should invest in some quality kneepads? Just trying to help! :O)

    Luuulllzzzlololllozzzkek.

    Ok let the hatefest begin. Everybody put me in my place! lol

  163. @BJ.

    I’m wondering if there is any point you would be willing to agree with Paul and actually consider someone “accursed”? Yes, I believe in grace and ongoing sanctification, I also believe in God’s wrath and in having a righteous fear of Him, something sadly lacking in a “Christian” author who idolizes tingles and teaches others to do likewise.

    “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:8-9)

  164. PokeSalad says:

    The evidence seems to be in Wilson’s own books,

    Nahh,…..he didnt really mean it! Well…he did then……or not now…..or when? Was it later? Now? Who knows? Who can tell? Did they read my latest blogpost? What? When?

  165. Pingback: The Dispensation of the Red Pill | Σ Frame

  166. Art Deco says:

    What makes this truly vile is that this whole thing is non-falsifiable. There is no way on Earth to prove what is really going on in a man’s heart. So wives can rebel all the day long, and there is no way to prove it wasn’t what Wilson describes here.

    Agreed. I think you see the ever-receding goal in a great deal of self-improvement literature, religious and secular.

  167. MKT says:

    I’ll give Wilson credit for this, though. He’s one of the few known pastors/teachers who calls out SJWs:
    https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/dear-thabiti.html

    Here’s what he’s responding to, in the “Gospel Coalition” no less:
    https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/thabiti-anyabwile/await-repentance-assassinating-dr-king/

    This sort of garbage has been forcing its way into the PCA, SBC and other “conservative stalwart Protestant” denominations for a while.

  168. Pingback: Blinded by chivalry. | Dalrock

  169. Pingback: My Unhappiness Is Your Fault! | Σ Frame

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.