Doug Wilson

Discussion in 'Theological Forum' started by WrittenFromUtopia, Jul 30, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. WrittenFromUtopia

    WrittenFromUtopia Puritan Board Graduate

    What does everyone on here think of this pastor, and his teachings?

    I have listened to quite a bit from him, and read some of his books. He seems to be very orthodox, in my estimation, but I disagree with him on a few points.

    Where do you all see him as being 100% correct or 100% in error?
     
  2. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Heretic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


    Just kidding. I had to say that to maintain semblances of orthodoxy; preserve the status quo. I have found his stuff on family, apologetics, etc quite useful.

    My favorite books by him are:

    1. Angels in the Architecture (kind of a worldview primer)
    2. Easy Chairs, Hard Words (conversational intro to Calvinism; quite useful).
    3. Persuasions: A Dream of Reason meeting Unbelief.
    4. Future Men

    His conference tapes on typology are superb.
     
  3. Scott Bushey

    Scott Bushey Puritan Board Doctor

    :ditto:

    However, blowing justification by faith alone pretty much destroys everything else.

    [Edited on 7-30-2005 by Scott Bushey]
     
  4. Bladestunner316

    Bladestunner316 Puritan Board Doctor

    Jesus is 100% correct

    Satan is 100& wrong

    :)
     
  5. WrittenFromUtopia

    WrittenFromUtopia Puritan Board Graduate

    To clarify, I mean on which issues of the faith is he orthodox and on which issues is he not?
     
  6. WrittenFromUtopia

    WrittenFromUtopia Puritan Board Graduate

    How does he blow justification by faith alone?
     
  7. Scott Bushey

    Scott Bushey Puritan Board Doctor

    His positioning himself with the Federal Visionists
     
  8. WrittenFromUtopia

    WrittenFromUtopia Puritan Board Graduate

    In his presbytery examination, he said he vehemently disagreed with people such as Shephard(sp?), Schlissel, Wright, etc. on the NPP view of Justification. He agreed 100% with what the Westminster Confession states on Justification by faith alone and imputed righteousness. *confused*
     
  9. JOwen

    JOwen Puritan Board Junior

    Dear friend,

    Doug Wilson is certainly not 100% in error. In fact in the basics he is very sound. By basics I mean the Trinity, hypostatic union, the Scriptures, etc. Unfortunately the 98% of Wilson's good doctrine is washed out by the 2% of his error. It is always the case thatt those who are closest to the truth are the most dangerous in error simply for the fact thatt they are often indistinguishable from the truth. Wilson has at least 7 exceptions to the WCF which denies the Covenant of Works as well as the historic understanding of Justification by imputed, alien righteousness, to the believer by faith alone. It is the nuance alterations of Wilson that makes him a particular danger to the newly Reformed.

    Also, Wilson has never been in the Reformed Church but parallel with it. Just recently he became a paedo baptist (last 5 years or so), and is still trying to figure out where he fits in. Wilson's problem is while he is formulating his ideas he's "thinking out loud", and taking may a wandering sould through his theological pilgrimage.
    :2cents:

    Kindly,

    [Edited on 7-30-2005 by JOwen]

    [Edited on 7-30-2005 by JOwen]
     
  10. Scott Bushey

    Scott Bushey Puritan Board Doctor

    I'm as well confused then.........I thought I had read something by Wilson subscribing to the idea. Anyone else wanna add something to this?
     
  11. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    In fact, Wilson has gone out of his way at his website to critique Wright's position of justification, election, judaism, etc. I have found Wilson's critiques of Wright to be of the best on the popular level.
     
  12. Scott Bushey

    Scott Bushey Puritan Board Doctor

    Was there a season where Wilson was aligning himself with the Fed Vis?

    [Edited on 7-30-2005 by Scott Bushey]
     
  13. WrittenFromUtopia

    WrittenFromUtopia Puritan Board Graduate

    He aligns himself with the 'movement', perse, but also says that there is no consensus among the movement on various issues, making it all the more confusing. He said that he is friends with these people, but disagrees with their viewpoints (on justifiction, etc.).
     
  14. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Perhaps, although it is not a uniform movement, as a quick reading of The Federal Vision. There is significant disagreement between them on some issues.

    NT Wrights and Wrongs

    This was the link I was looking for. He takes Wright's criticisms of the Reformed Faith and turns them back on Wright.
     
  15. Scott Bushey

    Scott Bushey Puritan Board Doctor

    Ok; aligning oneself with movements such as these, whether one fully agree's or not, will be viewed as serious error.
     
  16. C. Matthew McMahon

    C. Matthew McMahon Christian Preacher

    One of the things we do not want to do, especially on this board, and in our local churches, is to give credence to Doug Wilson, or any other advocate of the FV/AA ideas.

    2 Timothy 3:5, "And from such people turn away!"

    1 Timothy 6:5, "useless wranglings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From such withdraw yourself."

    In other words, if 95 % of what he says is right, but 5% is wrong, yet it touches on breaking up the fundamentals of essential Christian truth, then from such "TURN away."

    We could not, in good conscience, recommend him to others. In doing so you propagate his theological package.

    2 Timothy 2:17-18, "And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, 18 who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some."

    What was their sin? 10 wrong turns on doctrine? No. Five wrong turns? No. They taught the resurrection Had already come. A form of preterism. Paul says they have stayed from the truth, and that he has handed them over to Satan.

    He does not recommend we listen to them on their other points. All they are known for, now, is their heresy.

    All Wilson is known for now, is his heresy.
     
  17. Me Died Blue

    Me Died Blue Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    He does align himself with the FV movement - the thing is, that is a distinctly separate thing from the NPP, though they have overlaps here and there.
     
  18. toddpedlar

    toddpedlar Iron Dramatist Staff Member

    ...and there, and there, and there.... yes, they're separate, but their areas of commonality are enormous. More importantly, I think, their implications are in many particulars the same.

    Todd
     
  19. C. Matthew McMahon

    C. Matthew McMahon Christian Preacher

    The FV/AA guys are the birth children of NT Wright and the NPP. Its like modern formulations of Vampire movies - kill the main vampire and the rest would vaporize. If NT Wright had not spawned his heresy, the FV would not have men like Jordan, Lusk, Schlissel, Wilkins, and others propagating such anti-orthodox ideas. They are all unorthodox bloodsuckers.

    Pray for them. :pray2:
     
  20. Me Died Blue

    Me Died Blue Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    Agreed, not to mention that some of the FV proponents also support various doctrines of Wright. But one of the last things that will be able to either refute or change them is by simply lumping the FV and the NPP in one basket without qualification.
     
  21. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Given those standards, why should we ever read CS Lewis or GK Chesterton, for example?

    Yet John Frame in his book Doctrine of the Knowledge of God, states that such men as Lewis and Chesterton, Arminian and fierce Catholic respectively, ought to be read for apologetic issues. Therefore, reasoning by analogy, why not read Doug Wilson and when he is right on this issue or that, say it?
     
  22. C. Matthew McMahon

    C. Matthew McMahon Christian Preacher

    Jacob -

    I think we would have to make a distinction between a theological package that is evolving (Wilson) and one that is not (CS Lewis). I think that anyone is readable, but that is not my point. Since Wilson is in th heat of the controversy, right now, we ought not to propagate anythign written by him since his views are currently being disseminated and evolving.

    I thought his 5 Tools of Learning was a prettu good book. But I can't have someone read that then think about what else may be good, and then get hooked onto a heretical issue that is currently exapnding. I think our priority is to disengage our recommendatiosn for the sake of the issues currently being stirred.
     
  23. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    I see what you are saying. The misunderstanding was on my part. I see the distinction you are making between Lewis/Wilson
     
  24. Poimen

    Poimen Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    To some extent I would agree with this analysis though I would like to add that, In my humble opinion, they are even more influenced by Norman Shepherd.
     
  25. C. Matthew McMahon

    C. Matthew McMahon Christian Preacher

    There is not doubt of that. Shepherd is right in there as well. I would agree with you.
     
  26. fredtgreco

    fredtgreco Vanilla Westminsterian Staff Member

    Actually, there really is nothing new under the sun. It is much more a spring from the font of the Tractarian movement and the Merceberger theology of the 19th century; although Shepherd stands in this line as well.
     
  27. daveb

    daveb Puritan Board Sophomore

    In a recent WHI broadcast it was clear Wilson does not subscribe to either the WCF or the 3 forms (As far as I know the difference was justification, there may be other things). When a person claims to be Reformed but will not subscribe to a Reformed confession we have reason to be suspect.
     
  28. Bladestunner316

    Bladestunner316 Puritan Board Doctor

    tractarian?
     
  29. fredtgreco

    fredtgreco Vanilla Westminsterian Staff Member

    Wilson is a paedocommunionist, I believe. None of the Reformed Confessions allow for that.
     
  30. Scott Bushey

    Scott Bushey Puritan Board Doctor

    Tractarian

    The Oxford Movement was a loose affiliation of High Church Anglicans, most of them members of the University of Oxford, who sought to demonstrate that the Church of England was a direct descendant of the Christian church established by the Apostles. It was also known as the Tractarian Movement after its series of publications, Tracts for the Times (1833"“1841); the Tractarians were also called Puseyites (usually disparagingly) after one of their leaders, Edward Bouverie Pusey, Regius Professor of Hebrew at Christ Church, Oxford. Another important leader was John Henry Newman, a fellow of Oriel College, Oxford and vicar of the University Church of St Mary the Virgin in Oxford, who had been strongly influenced by a sermon by John Keble in 1833 criticizing the increasing secularisation of the Church of England. Other prominent Tractarians were John Keble, Thomas Keble, Archdeacon Henry Edward Manning, Richard Hurrell Froude and Robert Wilberforce.

    In the ninetieth and final Tract, Newman argued that the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church, as defined by the Council of Trent, were compatible with the Thirty-Nine Articles of the sixteenth-century Church of England. The Movement ended when Newman, driven further than he had expected by his own arguments, converted to Roman Catholicism in 1845, to be followed by Manning in 1851. Anglo-Catholicism, which owes its revival to the Oxford Movement, has had a massive influence on global Anglicanism which continues to this day.

    Taken from:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tractarian


    [Edited on 7-30-2005 by Scott Bushey]
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page