In 1996 Pastor Doug Wilson of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho, co-wrote a book with David Hagopian titled Beyond Promises: A Biblical Challenge to Promise Keepers (Moscow, ID: Canon Press). As the title says, they wrote it in response to Promise Keepers, which was (is) an evangelical parachurch group founded in 1990. Promise Keepers reduced the faith to what they called “the seven promises of a Promise Keeper” — a paint-by-numbers legalistic approach to Christianity, for men only. Promise Keepers enjoyed tremendous popularity in the mid- to late-’90s, filling stadiums across America with so-called promise keepers to encourage them to keep their promises.¹ Promise Keepers petered out in the early 2000s, though they still have a website.

Beyond Promises used Doug Wilson’s typical three-point outline for vaunting himself:

1. Patronize something constructive about the target (usually a point of agreement).
2. Identify the weakest point(s) of the target.
3. Drive a wedge through it, asserting himself (Doug Wilson) as God’s faithful (authoritative) teacher of the Bible on the subject at hand, as opposed to the target.

Canon Press put Beyond Promises out of print; I am unaware if it contained any plagiarized text.

However, since Beyond Promises asserts Doug Wilson and his co-author as God’s faithful teachers on the Bible subject at hand, it is full of money quotes on the subject of biblical oaths. The authors agonized over the excruciating details of what constitutes a proper oath according to Scripture. For example, consider this six-point guide; the gnat-straining deserves consideration:

Biblical Guidelines for Vows
Now that we have seen that the Bible does not condemn all vows, the key issue in analyzing the process of making the seven promises is whether the promises accord with the guidelines for making oaths and vows contained in the Bible. While the specific content of each promise will be analyzed in subsequent chapters, at this point we simply need to compare the process of making the seven promises to the following biblical principles for making vows.

1. The Vow Must be Biblical
   One cannot bind himself to do that which Scripture forbids, since no one can bind himself to sin.

2. The Vow Must be True
   What you are about to say must be true, or you must do what you are about to promise. “If a man makes a vow to the Lord, or takes a vow to bind himself with a binding obligation, he shall not violate his word; he shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth” (Num. 30:2). If, therefore, you know that you are about to utter a falsehood or you know that you have no intention of absolutely honoring your word, then you should not make the vow. As the Preacher in the Book of Ecclesiastes proclaims, “When you make a vow to God, do not be late in paying it, for He takes no delight in fools. Pay what you vow! It is better that you should not vow than that you should vow and not pay” (Eccl. 5:4–5).

3. The Vow Must be Necessary
   Even if what you say is true or you intend to honor what you promise, you should not vow if vowing is unnecessary (Ex. 20:7). Scripture forbids all superfluous vows (Matt. 5:33–37; 23:16–22). There must be an adequate reason why appealing to God is necessary (e.g., Ex 22:10–11). The third commandment condemns all unnecessary, colloquial, and irreverent vowing.

4. The Vow Must be Attainable
   You must be able to attain what you have vowed, and you must be prepared to abide by your vow, no matter how your personal interests or circumstances may change. The godly man “swears to his own hurt and does not change” (Ps. 15:4; 24:4). If you are not able, or prepared, to stand steadfastly by what you have vowed, no matter what happens, then you should not make the vow.

5. The Vow Must Appeal to God Alone
   Scripture emphatically commands us to swear only in the name of God (Deut. 6:13; 10:20; Jer. 5:7; Zeph. 1:4–5). In no uncertain terms, God forbids swearing by other gods because swearing is an act of religious worship; when people swear by other gods, they violate the first and second commandments. God is so angered with those who swear by other “gods” that He declares that He will “cut off” those who do so (Zeph. 1:4–5). Although oaths and vows must appeal to God alone, there are a variety of ways in which one can appeal to God in the context of a vow: (1) “give glory to the God of Israel” (Josh 7:19); (2) “as the Lord lives” (Judg. 8:19; Ruth 3:13; 1 Sam 14:39; 2 Sam. 2:27; Jer. 38:16); (3) “The Lord do so to me and more also” (Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam. 14:44; 2 Sam. 3:9, 35; 1 Kings 2:23; 2 Kings 6:31); (4) “May the Lord be a true and faithful witness” (Jer. 42:5); (5) “I adjure you by the living God” (Matt. 26:63); (6) “I adjure you by the Lord” (1 Thess. 5:27); (8) “But I call God as witness to my soul” (2 Cor.1:23); (9) “. . . God is witness” (1 Thess. 2:5); (10) “You are witnesses and so is God” (1 Thess. 2:10).

6. The Vow Must Be Clear and Unambiguous
   The language of the vow must be unequivocal and unambiguous so as to be clearly understood by all parties. The old Princeton theologian, Charles Hodge, told the story of a commander who swore to citizens of a besieged city that if they surrendered, not a drop of their blood would be shed. After securing their surrender, the commander then burned them all at the stake! We should never take oaths or make them by means of linguistic chicanery since “all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do” (Heb. 4:13).²

Also consider the threatening language used by the authors to motivate those who would violate an oath:

As we have already seen, the Bible also tells us that we are to “pay what [we] vow!” and that it “is better that [we] should not vow than that [we] should vow and not pay” (Eccl. 5:4–5). To make a vow we cannot or do not keep is to make a false vow. It is swearing God’s name to a falsehood. It is violating the third commandment, a sin of the most grievous sort.

“Where a vow is falsely taken,” warns one writer, “it is a heaven-daring attempt to enlist the Almighty in the sanction of the creature’s lie and is thus, either the most outrageous levity, or the most outrageous impiety of which he can be guilty.”¹³ It is always dangerous to engage in “heaven-daring” behavior. Lest we forget, the third commandment contains a promise, a promise of punishment for those who violate it: “the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh His name in vain” (Ex. 20:7). Since God will punish those who take His name in vain, we would do well to realize that it is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God. Instead of invoking God’s greater wrath and judgment by making false vows, we must begin to honor God in all that we do and in all that we say. We should also refrain from making unnecessary vows, and this relates to the seven promises.³

¹³ Ibid. 143–44. R. L. Dabney, Systematic Theology (Edinburgh, Scotland: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1985 [1871]), p. 364.

This brings us to Jamin Wight’s sworn confession of guilt, which he gave while “under oath before God.” Presumably Douglas Wilson administered the oath, unless you believe he took a back seat to Dr. Peter Leithart. Either way, we can be sure that Jamin Wight satisfied Doug Wilson’s six-point guideline for oath-taking because Mr. Wilson informed the Moscow Police Department of its legitimacy: “The first thing we did was place Jamin under oath, and when he was under oath before God. . .” And we can be equally sure that Mr. Wilson personally witnessed Jamin Wight swear that he sexually abused Natalie Greenfield: “we asked him if the written confession he had provided to the Greenfields some months ago was a true and accurate account. He replied that it was. . .”

And to be clear, Jamin Wight’s written confession states this:

. . . . During all of this, I was fully aware that Natalie was only 14 and 15 years old. . . . There may have been times that I told her not to tell anyone. But what I remember more clearly and I think was more wicked was how I manipulated her. . . . Regardless of how severe the consequences, I can finally be free from this filthy sin and guilt. (Jamin Wight’s Written Confession of Sin)

Twenty-four-year-old Jamin Wight swore that he “was fully aware that Natalie was only 14 and 15 years old” (he began grooming her at 13). Jamin Wight swore that he manipulated her. And Jamin Wight swore that he would be free of his guilt — “Regardless of how severe the consequences.” But these things moved not Doug Wilson. He didn’t rattle off a list of Bible verses for Mr. Wight to keep his oath. No threats of sanctions from the Almighty. Not even a weighty quote from Robert Lewis Dabney about “heaven-daring behavior.” Instead of encouraging Mr. Wight to keep his sworn “oath before God,” Doug Wilson helped Jamin Wight elude it. He gave his ministerial student a litany of excuses to recite, such as “secret courtship” or Natalie’s parents acted foolishly, etc.; and he pushed this defense on Kirk & Court — and anyone else willing to listen.

Pastor Doug Wilson of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho, abetted Jamin Wight’s criminal behavior. He approved of the young man’s false oath; he taught him to escape accountability by blame-shifting; and he restored him to ministry in the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC), in violation of his written assurance to the local community. Douglas Wilson fortified Jamin Wight in his depravity.

Jamin Wight was 27-years old when he swore his confession of guilt. Douglas Wilson was 53-years old when he helped his protégé dodge it. Neither man has demonstrated that they understand that a 24-year-old man should never touch a 14-year-old girl for sexual gratification — under any circumstances. Both are moral imbeciles. But don’t take my word for it. Put Douglas Wilson under oath. After all, he wrote the book.⁴

¹ Promise Keepers intersects with the Federal Vision at this point. Both are predicated on a works-based salvation. Promise Keepers calls it “promise keeping”; the Federal Vision calls it “covenant keeping” or “keeping covenant.”
² Douglas Wilson & David Hagopian, Beyond Promises: A Biblical Challenge to Promise Keepers (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 1996), 138–41.
³ Ibid. 143–44.
⁴ In 2002 the Kirk planted a CREC church in Mission Viejo, California, appointing David Hagopian (co-author of Beyond Promises) as one of its teaching elders. They named it Ancient Hope Reformed Church. In 2003, the Kirk sent Jamin Wight to intern at Ancient Hope for the summer, but the Ancient Hope elders returned him to Moscow after he engaged in an “flirtation kind of inappropriate thing” (Shubin Report, page 222). Ancient Hope Reformed Church dissolved not long after.