Doug Wilson Calls Antioch Declaration His Dog, Attacks Joel Webbon

Last year, Doug Wilson played an integral role in producing the Antioch Declaration, a response to rising Christian ministries that opposed Modern Judaism and feminism unapologetically. Whereas the former was the primary focus of the Antioch Declaration, the latter was exemplified in how Doug Wilson and family encouraged wives to disobey their husbands over politically incorrect views.

Doug Wilson’s reason for the Antioch Declaration cited the contentious nomination of Pete Hegseth to Secretary of Defense. This proved to be a nonfactor, as the rising antisemitism in Christian circles was not a top eight answer on the board for why Pete Hegeseth had an uphill battle to be confirmed. Nevertheless, Doug Wilson, in the Antioch Declaration, argued that it is sinful for Christians to consider Modern Judaism more of a threat than anything else, stating:

We deny that Jews are in any way uniquely malevolent or sinful, that Judaism in its multifarious expressions is objectively more dangerous than other false religions, or that it represents an exceptional threat to Christianity and Christian peoples.

Thus, Judaism is either the least threatening pagan religion to Christianity or every religion is equal as a threat, which would include Norse mythology and forgotten faiths. This was sinful partiality and willful blindness. But several months later, Doug Wilson doubled down on his pet project.

In an article titled, Love Me, Love My Dog, Doug Wilson views himself and the Moscow Mood as white blood cells in American Evangelicalism.

A friend was once talking with someone about the ads that New St Andrews College has run, and the response that his friend had was telling . . . and I think on point. “There are some problems that college will never have.” The ads serve a valuable function in that they keep a certain kind of student from even applying, and they serve the same function when it comes to screening potential faculty.

But this is not an approach that only wards off the woke commies. This very same principle is what was behind my work with the Antioch Declaration, for example. If anyone wants to be associated with us, then they need to be associated with that. Love me, love my dog. Something really good is happening here, and we don’t want the malicious progressives latching onto it to destroy it by destroying it, and we don’t want malicious reactionaries latching onto it to destroy it by defending it.

The Antioch Declaration is called his dog here, and I cannot help but think that this is in line with the tendency of Americans to humanize their animals. Nevertheless, Wilson articulates that the Antioch Declaration is a test of association with him. Indeed, Joel Webbon’s partnership with Andrew Isker closed the doors to Moscow, Idaho, something brought up in the next paragraph. But Wilson views himself as the thrid way between the right wing and the left much like Tim Keller.

Put this another way. Most evangelical Christians don’t think in terms of institutional discipline at all. But those who do think of it, tend to rely heavily on the tactic of “mark and avoid.” Identify who the bad guys are, and then mark and avoid them (Rom. 16:17). Now of course there really is a place for that because it is in the Bible after all. When the time comes, obedience requires that you recognize that Joel Webbon has maneuvered himself into a really bad spot, and that nobody sensible should want to join him there. But the mark and avoid tactic is what you need to be doing when you are running a high temperature.

Doug Wilson attacks Joel Webbon not for the past sin he repented of over a decade ago, but for the Jewish debate. This article serves as a pile on against Webbon, but it’s worth commending the fact that Doug Wilson likely knew of Joel Webbon’s past, and operated with some biblical rules of engagement. This doesn’t excuse his role in the Tobias Riemenschneider conspiracy, but at least there are some lines Wilson will not cross.

Doug Wilson sees himself as a gatekeeper of Evangelicalism, but there is no gate to guard. Young Christians will go on questioning Jewish influence in our society (and churches) and the institutionalized feminism.