Thread: And so it begins/Moscow attack on Reformedmusings

This is pathetic; you can't make this stuff up. Praying for you Bob.
And So It Begins << Green Bagginses; link broken now; page taken down.
Attack from Moscow &#171; Reformed Musings

I smell a Tort!

NaphtaliPress;



May God give us all wisdom and discernment in all of this...may He use it to grow us to be more like Him...

Doug Wilson's Credena Agenda site was one of the ones from which I learned quite a bit about the doctrines of sovereign grace, after having been blindsided by a sermon on predestination at Christ Chapel.

I've got Reformed Marriage, Federal Husband, Fruit of Her Hands, and a couple of other books by him and his wife.

His ability to debate atheists is matchless. I've learned so much reading him over the years.

So it's painful to watch him implode in the way he is. Gives me a sense of deja vu, AAMOF, taking me back to the days of Watergate. I wasn't any big fan of Nixon, but still, lots of good people were adamant supporters of his and I couldn't believe he'd be so stupidly arrogant (arrogantly stupid?) as to pull the stunts of which he was being accused.

Turned out, of course, that he had become exactly that stupid and arrogant. Many of his fervent fans, who'd worked for years to get him into the White House, were shattered by the Watergate revelations.

ISTM Wilson's mirroring Nixon, with a similarly unpleasant end looming up in front of him.

Not that he'd be capable of seeing it coming. Nixon sure couldn't.

I daresay I'm going to be alone in my belief that rather than publicizing Wilson & Co. unchristian, uncharitable, unwise bletherings, it'd be most prudent and God-honoring to simply ignore them.

First, because we mimic our Savior most closely when we suffer as He did.....in silence, making no attempt to return fire.

Second, because if we'd step back and look at the situation logically, Wilson's doing a dandy job of self-destructing. He doesn't need our help. He's insulted the entire hierarchy of the PCA, and that denomination's judicial system. He's hardly on good terms with the OPC. Thinking about it, I'm wondering if there's a single Reformed denomination with which he's currently getting along, outside of his own CREC.

He's no longer published in TableTalk or any other Reformed literary vehicle, is he?

His church and college are unable to get along with the community in which they reside. From what I can tell, Wilson's ministry is enormously dependent upon the internet, especially now that he's positioned himself to take on all comers.

His New Saint Andrews' College, once one cuts through the verbiage about how they've limited the number of students they accept, is a tiny, podunk college that can't manage to scrape together more than 170 f/t and p/t students, and at that they have to rely upon the internet, since it's a cinch they don't get many students from their natural market, i.e. Idaho. Instead NSA has to draw from 32 states and a handful of foreign countries to be able to cobble together 170 students. When one's enrollment is that minuscule, drawing from so many states and nations is actually not a positive. Of course, NSA isn't going to point that out, and I don't blame them. Were I a part of a college that had to scramble for students, I would try my best to put a shiny gloss on it too.
My point is that he's doing a fine job of marginalizing himself by first alienating the community in which he lives, and now alienating a large part of the nation's Reformed world. Increasingly he's reminding me of those strange new converts to Eastern/Western/Russian Orthodoxy, who do not actually live in an area that has an Orthodox church. They discovered it via the internet, learned about it from the internet, and the only Orthodox people they know are those on the internet.

John MacArthur and R.C. Sproul have been significant forces in the Reformed world, as I understand it, for decades. They have never been dependent upon the internet for their respective ministries' existence, and were the internet to suddenly crash for the long-term, they'd keep right on being significant forces. I don't see the same being true for Wilson. Were the internet to crash and burn, there he'd be, stuck in a town that dislikes him, dependent upon pricey postage to communicate with his supporters, and finding it hard to garner new ones.

I think he'd drop off the radar startlingly fast.

If people would quit promoting and advertising him by spreading word of his misdeeds via the internet, he'll probably drop off the radar anyway, though not so rapidly. He's alienated his geographical market. He's busily alienating his Reformed market by attacking every Reformed denomination save his own. He's not being invited to participate in nearly as many conferences, etc. as he once was.

Gentlemen, I assure you, if y'all will ignore him and his minions, stop visiting their websites and blogs, and generally act as if they aren't there, before too long they most likely won't be there.

Originally Posted by NaphtaliPress

This is pathetic; you can't make this stuff up. Praying for you Bob.

Attack from Moscow &#171; Reformed Musings

Gryphonette;

If people would quit promoting and advertising him by spreading word of his misdeeds via the internet, he'll probably drop off the radar anyway, though not so rapidly. He's alienated his geographical market. He's busily alienating his Reformed market by attacking every Reformed denomination save his own. He's not being invited to participate in nearly as many conferences, etc. as he once was.

Gentlemen, I assure you, if y'all will ignore him and his minions, stop visiting their websites and blogs, and generally act as if they aren't there, before too long they most likely won't be there.

With all respect, they can't do that as long as he is a TE of the PCA, as Pastors and TE's of the PCA, they are doing what they are being called to do...hold him to account for what he is teaching the flock of which they are also a part.

I know the elders of my church are watching this fairly closely...my pastor and I have spoken about the issue, and he mentioned if the issue is not addressed he's not sure he can remain a PCA pastor...and knowing most of the churches in our area are not reformed...I'd have a very difficult time locating another church home...so it is not a matter of ignoring the issues and he will go away...it hasn't gone away yet, simply because it has been ignored for many many years...

It is easy to do, but I think you are confusing Wilson with Wilkins; the PCA cannot ignore the latter. The former it may very well be prudent to try to ignore. It is not unique to our time that such a choice needs making; do you ignore a contentious element that may self destruct or do you defend yourself and the truth. Tough call.

Anne:

I am sympathetic to your point about ignoring Wilson. That would be easier to do, however, if his negative influence wasn't showing up in virtually every nook and cranny of the Reformed world. In fact I never thought that FV would make its home in my former denomination but I was naive. It can happen anywhere; anywhere young men and women are stirred up by charismatic leaders who are larger than life but who don't really have any true godliness or concern for the sheep.

However, as someone who has dealt with his followers and supporters (though never directly with the man himself) I can say that most of what you say there looks to be as accurate a prediction as stating that the sun will rise tomorrow.

Wilson's a TE of the PCA?

When'd that happen?

Even creeping into a mothering board with several Reformed women. Or into areas where women come together because of views on the home or shared interests such as books and tapes from Vision Forum. Yeah, not fully avoidable.

No Wilkins is a TE in the PCA; Wilson is not. Chris was simply correcting the mix-up in post #5.

Aside from most accurately and faithfully mimicking Christ when we ignore jabs and stabs from self-professed enemies (BTW....and I know this is going to be hard for y'all to believe, such an embodiment of sweetness and light as I am....I've suffered such jabs and stabs myself on more than one occasion over the years; refusing to reply or even go look to see the crud written about me wasn't easy, but hey - it worked; by refusing to engage I didn't add fuel to the fire, allowing the kerfluffles to wither and die), replying in kind provides Wilson & Co. with opportunities to wrap the mantle of martyrhood around themselves, and if there's one thing at which they're skilled it's capitalizing on such opportunities.

For those on the fence, or those who aren't already emotionally shackled to Wilson, if he keeps attacking and attacking and attacking without himself ever being attacked, eventually the gilt will rub off and the truth laid bare.

I didn't actually expect all you gentlemen to immediately heed my sound advice, though. ;^)

Guys tend to be such fierce types!

Figured it wouldn't do any harm to have someone suggest an alternate method of dealing with the lies and calumnies being hacked up by Wilson & Co. than that of going on the offensive.

Gentlemen, I assure you, if y'all will ignore him and his minions, stop visiting their websites and blogs, and generally act as if they aren't there, before too long they most likely won't be there.

That is an interesting point; though I doubt we, or they, have the self-restraint required to do that.

While I don't claim to know much about the ins and outs of the debate in the PCA (though I did watch the discussion in the General Assembly), would it not just be esaier for everyone in Steve Wilkins joined the CREC?

Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie

While I don't claim to know much about the ins and outs of the debate in the PCA (though I did watch the discussion in the General Assembly), would it not just be esaier for everyone in Steve Wilkins joined the CREC?

Well, he'd be much more honest if he did that, than if he tries to stick it out (but it's so nice to be able to claim martyrship!)

Originally Posted by toddpedlar

Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie

While I don't claim to know much about the ins and outs of the debate in the PCA (though I did watch the discussion in the General Assembly), would it not just be esaier for everyone in Steve Wilkins joined the CREC?

Well, he'd be much more honest if he did that, than if he tries to stick it out (but it's so nice to be able to claim martyrship!)

Good point; men like to be made martyrs for their hobby-horses - just look at Servetus.

Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie

Originally Posted by toddpedlar

Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie

While I don't claim to know much about the ins and outs of the debate in the PCA (though I did watch the discussion in the General Assembly), would it not just be esaier for everyone in Steve Wilkins joined the CREC?

Well, he'd be much more honest if he did that, than if he tries to stick it out (but it's so nice to be able to claim martyrship!)

Good point; men like to be made martyrs for their hobby-horses - just look at Servetus.

The one thing self-promoters cannot bear is to be ignored. Attacks and such are welcomed, for they provide a bully pulpit () for them, and provide support for their claims of martyrhood.

Giving them increased opportunities for "Pity poor us, look how we're maligned and mistreated!" is a mistake, ISTM.

Originally Posted by Gryphonette

Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie

Originally Posted by toddpedlar

Well, he'd be much more honest if he did that, than if he tries to stick it out (but it's so nice to be able to claim martyrship!)

Good point; men like to be made martyrs for their hobby-horses - just look at Servetus.

The one thing self-promoters cannot bear is to be ignored. Attacks and such are welcomed, for they provide a bully pulpit () for them, and provide support for their claims of martyrhood.

Giving them increased opportunities for "Pity poor us, look how we're maligned and mistreated!" is a mistake, ISTM.

Excellent point sister - much wisdom in these thoughts there is.

NaphtaliPress;

It is easy to do, but I think you are confusing Wilson with Wilkins; the PCA cannot ignore the latter. The former it may very well be prudent to try to ignore. It is not unique to our time that such a choice needs making; do you ignore a contentious element that may self destruct or do you defend yourself and the truth. Tough call.

Thank you for the correction...

Well, apparently it's been going on for some 20+ years now and it's apparently gotten worse not better, I remember when I was stationed in Mtn. Home, Id., back in '82 part of the in-briefing we got on base was for women and blacks not to go to up into Moscow, because of the bigotry up in the area..

I was a new Christian back then, knew Christ about a year at the time, and had I not listened to the very wise Pastor on base at the time I would have gone up that way, only because it is such a beautiful area of the country...so even ignoring him hasn't caused him to go away...

So should we continue to ignore it, when things have only gotten worse??

Originally Posted by BJClark

NaphtaliPress;

It is easy to do, but I think you are confusing Wilson with Wilkins; the PCA cannot ignore the latter. The former it may very well be prudent to try to ignore. It is not unique to our time that such a choice needs making; do you ignore a contentious element that may self destruct or do you defend yourself and the truth. Tough call.

Thank you for the correction...

Well, apparently it's been going on for some 20+ years now and it's apparently gotten worse not better, I remember when I was stationed in Mtn. Home, Id., back in '82 part of the in-briefing we got on base was for women and blacks not to go to up into Moscow, because of the bigotry up in the area..

What has been going on for 20+ years?

CT

ChristianTrader;

What has been going on for 20+ years?

Here is a link you can read the links on the site..

index

Daniel, I have asked myself why Steve Wilkins does not join Doug Wilson's group. He is associated more with the CREC than the PCA. I am sure others are asking that question.

Originally Posted by NaphtaliPress

This is pathetic; you can't make this stuff up. Praying for you Bob.*The GB link is gone now*
Attack from Moscow &#171; Reformed Musings

"And so it begins" is a broken link.

Originally Posted by Stephen

Daniel, I have asked myself why Steve Wilkins does not join Doug Wilson's group. He is associated more with the CREC than the PCA. I am sure others are asking that question.

On what do you base that assessment?

I simply base my assessment on what I have observed. Wilkins uses Peter Leithart and Wilson for speakers at all his conferences. He is always promoting their work and speaks at conferences for the CREC.

Originally Posted by Stephen

I simply base my assessment on what I have observed. Wilkins uses Peter Leithart and Wilson for speakers at all his conferences. He is always promoting their work and speaks at conferences for the CREC.

But a number of ministers in the PCA participate in outside conferences and have outside speakers into their churches. Some of these visiting speakers, etc are not even Presbyterians. Should such associations be avoided for appearances sake?

BTW, I believe Dr. Leithart is a minister in good standing in the PCA.

Originally Posted by mangum

Originally Posted by NaphtaliPress

This is pathetic; you can't make this stuff up. Praying for you Bob.*The GB link is gone now*
Attack from Moscow « Reformed Musings

"And so it begins" is a broken link.

Yes; the page was taken down; links disabled in posts above.

In this case ignoring will not work because these is a "cause." They have an agenda to prosecute and it is about them being right and bringing everyone else to the realization that they are right.

When heresy rises in an evangelical body, it is never frank and open. It always begins by skulking, and assuming a disguise. Its advocates, when together, boast of great improvements, and congratulate one another on having gone greatly beyond the old dead orthodoxy, and on having left behind many of its antiquated errors: but when taxed with deviations from the received faith, they complain of the unreasonableness of their accusers, as they differ from it only in words. This has been the standing course of errorists ever since the apostolic age. They are almost never honest and candid as a party, until they gain strength enough to be sure of some degree of popularity. Thus it was with Arius in the fourth century, with Pelagius in the fifth, with Arminius and his companions in the seventeenth, with Amyraut and his associates in France soon afterwards, and with the Unitarians in Massachusetts, toward the close of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth centuries. They denied their real tenets, evaded examination or inquiry, declaimed against their accusers as merciless bigots and heresy-hunters, and strove as long as they could to appear to agree with the most orthodox of their neighbours; until the time came when, partly from inability any longer to cover up their sentiments, and partly because they felt strong enough to come out, they at length avowed their real opinions. Samuel Miller

Now people may debate whether something rises to the level of Hersey or just serious error and I did not revisit this quote to argue that, however the principles are the same, heresey or error.

Hoo-hoo! Great quote, and extremely applicable to the present situation.

Tell you what other situation it's applicable, and that's the taking over of egalitarianism and feminism in the evangelical world. The cited description is eerily accurate as to how egalitarianism rose to prominence in denomination after denomination.

Which is what makes me feel like banging my head on the desk when I read that the FV adherents are a first-line of defense against egalitarianism. Not when one considers the mode of Scripture-handling the FV uses, combined with their "we're not taking away, we're just adding on" tactic. Plus the "y'all don't have to necessarily agree with us...can't we co-exist?"

Gee. Let's take a gander at the ECUSA to see how that worked out.

(Comparatively) conservative egalitarians took grave and vehement exception to warnings that the same arguments they - the egalitarians - were using were someday going to lead to acceptance of homosexual unions and ordinations. Oh, goodness no! That would never happen.

Ha. Did too, and it didn't take long, either.

It doesn't matter a flip that the current crop of FV'ers are against egalitarianism; if the FV succeeds in elbowing their way into the PCA, there's not a doubt in my mind that denomination will go the way of the ECUSA, as regards doctrinal standards.

Originally Posted by BJClark

ChristianTrader;

What has been going on for 20+ years?

Here is a link you can read the links on the site..

index

This from the site:

The centerpiece of the conference is Mr. Wilson's talk on R.L. Dabney. Dabney was a marginal religious figure in the antebellum South who has been appropriated by the neo-Confederate and Reconstructionist movements. Dabney was a secessionist, proslavery apologist, and opponent of African-American education and interracial marriages.

Is this true about Dabney? Being a Baptist from just over the M-D line, I have never heard this...

What, that he was a marginal religious figure? That isn't true surely.

Originally Posted by NaphtaliPress

What, that he was a marginal religious figure? That isn't true surely.

There's a smart alec in every bunch.

Originally Posted by Gryphonette

Gee. Let's take a gander at the ECUSA to see how that worked out.

Originally Posted by Calvibaptist

Originally Posted by BJClark

ChristianTrader;

What has been going on for 20+ years?

Here is a link you can read the links on the site..

index

This from the site:

The centerpiece of the conference is Mr. Wilson's talk on R.L. Dabney. Dabney was a marginal religious figure in the antebellum South who has been appropriated by the neo-Confederate and Reconstructionist movements. Dabney was a secessionist, proslavery apologist, and opponent of African-American education and interracial marriages.

Is this true about Dabney? Being a Baptist from just over the M-D line, I have never heard this...

Dabney was not only a noted Calvinist theologain but a chaplain of the 18th Virginia regiment in the Confederate army (his wife was a relative of Stonewall Jackson). He actually served as chief of staff to Jackson during the Valley Campaign and the Seven Days Battles.

Following the Civil War he wrote and spoke widely about Stonewall Jackson (about whom he had written a biography) as well as the Confederacy. Yes, he did support slavery in his speeches and even a book published after the war. In this sense, you might say that he held reacial views typical of men in his time and locale.