Doug Wilson???

Nse007 said:

Any one that's been in reformed circles long enough has heard of Doug Wilson. What are your thoughts? Good for the Body, or not so good. Why? I personally think he's a fabulous writer, which is why I also think he can be very dangerous.

Click to expand...

You really are trying to open up a can of worms aren't you .

I think he is a great writer. I enjoy Credenda/Agenda now and then (on line). Doug Wilson is also, as I am sure you know, a bit controversial in some areas. I personally think it is a much ado about (mostly) nothing.

I think Wilson, like many other Reformed writers, is good on some issues and not so good on others.

In Christ,
Kenith

Good Day, All

Is not Doug Wilson the "father" of the auburn Ave. mess? I heard him on a show with J. Lig. Duncan a while back.

Peace to u,

Bill

Nse007 said:

Sometimes there's nothing like a fresh can to hit the spot...of worms i mean

Click to expand...

Good Day, Nse007

I will take a can of big fat juicy ones .. Please.

Peace to u,

Bill

BBAS 64 said:

Good Day, All

Is not Doug Wilson the "father" of the auburn Ave. mess? I heard him on a show with J. Lig. Duncan a while back.

Peace to u,

Bill

Click to expand...

Doug Wilso is not the "Father" of the Auburn Ave whoopla, but he is certainly an important part of it. I think much of the Whoopla is over blown. Yes there are some important differences, but I don't think they are as great as the sometimes heated rhetoric of bothsides would indicate.

Since Nse007 opened this can and I've thrown my two cents in, I guess I will eat some worms with y'all .

In Christ,
Kenith

I have no idea what you guys are talking about.
Someone want to explain, please.

Nse007 said:

I think Cajun maybe a sympathizer ;c) Doug Wilson is a prolific author coming out of Moscow, ID. This Auburn Heresy is more than some would let on. It has to do with Justification and what is called Covenantal Redemption. If you do a google search for Auburn Heresy, it will come up.
His books on courtship, family life, and christian life however are, I think, spot on (minus the hyper covenantal stuff)

Click to expand...

First, I do object to the term heresy at this point. Second, there are solid Reformed thinkers on bothsides of this debate.

I have a couple of books on by the Auburn Ave controversy. One is by the AU folks and the other is, which is a pro/con discussion put out by Knox Seminary and edited by an anti-Auburn Ave theologian.

I have not yet read enough to comedown on one side of the the other, but I do know that there is plenty of hyperbole to go around.

I am in the PCA's Louisiana Presbytery. Auburn Ave. PCA Church is in Louisiana Presbytery. The former pastor of my Church is a strongly anti-Auburn Ave man and he was on the committee investigating Steve Wilkins (Pastor of Auburn Ave PCA). Because of my pastors strong views, I was surprised that he and the committee concluded that Rev. Wlkins was not out of bounds in his beliefs. The committee cleared Wilkins at the Presbytery level.

I do like Wilsons writings. I've been reading him now and then long before he or the Auburn Ave. stuff took off. His series on the family (what I've read of it) is very good and I recommend it highly.

Coram Deo,
Kenith

I have read Doug Wilson for many, many years. I first learned of him through Classical Christian Homeschooling as his efforts with establishing Logos School and the ACCS have been invaluable to the Classical school and homeschooling movements. One of my children attends an ACCS school. I am not a member of his denomination, the Confederation of Reformed Evangelicals, but the PCA. I don't agree with everything Mr. Wilson writes, but I respect him and think he is a hoot! I don't agree with everything in my own denomination either. I have not followed the Auburn Ave Controversy closely however, I tend to agree with Kenith that it has been a bit overblown. I know a couple of men who know Mr. Wilson well and I have great respect for these men.

CC&E

Nse007 said:

It also goes by the term the "New Perspective on Paul" gracealone...just so you know

Click to expand...

NPP and Auburn Avenue Theology/Federal Vision are not the same thing. They have some things in common, yes, but they are two different things.

Sometime within the past 6 months Doug Wilson was a guest on "The White Horse Inn" and discussed the Federal Vision/Auburn Ave. debate. While I can't recall everything he had to say (I'll sort through my cd's and see if I can find it) I seem to remember him saying that some of what was attributed to him was overblown. Something to the effect of he was with John Doe and John Doe said "x" therefore Doug Wilson supports "x."

All of which goes to show:
1. We need to be careful of who we associate with
2. We're all human and we all err
3. Some things need to be taken with a big grain of salt and we need to be discerning

edie

edb19 said:

All of which goes to show:
1. We need to be careful of who we associate with
2. We're all human and we all err
3. Some things need to be taken with a big grain of salt and we need to be discerning

edie

Click to expand...

Actually EVERYTHING (except the Bible) we read or hear must be taken with a grain of salt.
We are all individually responsible for everything we take in and accept.
JUST BECAUSE so and so said it is NOT acceptable.
JUST BECAUSE it was said by a Calvinist is NOT acceptable.

I have read some really awful things written by Dougles Wilson. Not only does he deride the rationality of man, but he appears to uphold a Romish form of justification by works. I recommend you keep clear.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

Jon_ said:

I have read some really awful things written by Dougles Wilson. Not only does he deride the rationality of man, but he appears to uphold a Romish form of justification by works. I recommend you keep clear.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

Click to expand...

Jon,

I agree with most of what you write, but on this one I am going to have to ask for some proof. I have only read a small portion of what Doug Wilson has written, but I have never read anything that I can recall of that smacked of a "Romish" view of Justification.

It may be in the AU controversy stuff that I've yet to read. I do agree with edb19. I found much of his Credenda stuff to be a hoot.

In Christ,
Kenith

gracealone said:

Actually EVERYTHING (except the Bible) we read or hear must be taken with a grain of salt.
We are all individually responsible for everything we take in and accept.
JUST BECAUSE so and so said it is NOT acceptable.
JUST BECAUSE it was said by a Calvinist is NOT acceptable.

Click to expand...

Maggie,

I stand corrected. Thanks for your insight.

edie

I can't really say much about Wilson that Kenith hasn't already said. I agree that it is largely overblown, as far as I understand the controversy (which is not as much as I'd like to understand). I also think that much of what I've read from Doug Wilson is fabulous, and he is often a gust of fresh air in what can sometimes be a dusty, stuffy tradition (look at how easily folks in Reformed circles will throw out the "heretic" label).

My problem with Wilson and others is the ever-shifting positions which become difficult to follow. They need to work these things out first in order to avoid leading those new arrivals to the Reformed camp astray. What troubles me is how willing FV folks are to hold very loosely or even deny some parts of the Reformed confessions, and yet still insist on calling themselves strictly Reformed. Justification is a very important doctrine, and I think the confessions are clear on this, and we need to be extremely careful before we toy with the confessional position on justification. I'm not yet convinced that the FV is as unconfessional or heretical as many are saying, but there's definitely some funny business going on. I think there's a lot of confusion in language between FV and other Reformed believers.

Cajun Huguenot said:

Jon,

I agree with most of what you write, but on this one I am going to have to ask for some proof. I have only read a small portion of what Doug Wilson has written, but I have never read anything that I can recall of that smacked of a "Romish" view of Justification.

It may be in the AU controversy stuff that I've yet to read. I do agree with edb19. I found much of his Credenda stuff to be a hoot.

In Christ,
Kenith

Click to expand...

Hey Kenith,

Of course. Citations are certainly called for. I will round up as many as I can in order to present his view as fully as I can. I am a little limited in that I don't actually own any of his books, though.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

To see just how bad the communication is between the Aub Ave./Fed Vis and the mainline PCA is right now, read Brian Chapelle's paper on it, then read Richard Lusk's response to it. It sounds like it's time to get all these guys around a table and lock them in, they need to figure out what the other side is, and is not saying.

You can download the papers at monergism.com, Chappelle's paper is actually pretty short.