# Eating the Meat / Throw Away the Bones



## C. Matthew McMahon (Dec 31, 2004)

Let's ask this question - why would Christians want to read material that is "so so?" In other words, besides research (say you were doing a paper on Oswald Chambers), why would a Reformed Christian want to read books where they eat the meat and throw away the bones? Why not just eat meat? (At whatever level you are at?)

I'm thinking through this. The Sonship thread sparked it. Why do through the Purpose Driven Life, or the Sonship Lectures, or the Experiecning God bible to "Eat the meat and throw away the bones?"

Why do Christians do that instead of just reading Rutherford, Burroughs, or Lloyd-Jones? Do we REALLY need Sonship? No. Do we really need the Expereicning God henry Balckaby Bible? Not really, No. Do we need the Purpose Driven.....we won't go there. 

So your thoughts?


----------



## Me Died Blue (Dec 31, 2004)

I do think it is beneficial (and perhaps even necessary) to read shallow or opposing material simply to better understand it and be better equipped to expose it as a counterfeit to the precious truth. But that alone is the only benefit I see to reading such material, as I fully agree with you that trying to read such material for the purpose of eating whatever meat might happen to be there is pointless and in fact bad stewardship, since even if we dedicated the rest of our lives to reading _only_ books from very Reformed, sound and beneficial authors, we would never get through it all. So since there is already more books that are pure "meat" than any of us will ever be able to read, I completely agree that, apart from reading them for educated refutal, material that is mostly bones is vain to read in a "looking for the meat remains" manner. Wow...I'm in a wordy mood tonight.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Dec 31, 2004)

You are what you eat............

Gal 5:9 A little leaven leavens all the lump. 

The problem is, is we do not know leaven when we see it.


----------



## king of fools (Dec 31, 2004)

I see your point and agree with you. However, sometimes I read stuff to gain ammo to use as talking points with my arminian friends and collegues. Something like "Fresh Wind, Fresh Fire" might not have awakened me to a deep knowledge of the work of Christ, but allows me to join in conversation about it (and throw in some objections) when other people begin to talk about it.


----------



## Ivan (Dec 31, 2004)

> _Originally posted by webmaster_
> Let's ask this question - why would Christians want to read material that is "so so?" In other words, besides research (say you were doing a paper on Oswald Chambers), why would a Reformed Christian want to read books where they eat the meat and throw away the bones? Why not just eat meat? (At whatever level you are at?)
> 
> I'm thinking through this. The Sonship thread sparked it. Why do through the Purpose Driven Life, or the Sonship Lectures, or the Experiecning God bible to "Eat the meat and throw away the bones?"
> ...



Yes, I agree. In fact, two of the "meatless" authors you mentioned. who happened to be Southern Baptists, I have read. Years I ago I did go through the _Experiencing God_ program with my church. I can't say I saw any benefit from it and I've become much more savvy in my later years about such "programs". 

I read the PDL because my church (and I'm only a member there, but apparently have a certain amount of influence with the pastor and the members) wanted to do it, at least study the book together...they couldn't afford to do the actual program (somebody is making a TON of money). After reading it, I said...NAY!!! And I told them why. I haven't heard anymore about it since. 

You mention Lloyd-Jones. Now there is a writer worthy to read. I am currently reading through Ephesians and what marvelous writing it is! My pastor wants me to do an evening Bible study on the book of Ephesians sometime next year. Oh, boy, is the fur going to fly!!


----------



## RamistThomist (Dec 31, 2004)

Sometimes we just have to read Evanjelly Fluff. That way when we rightly riducle Warren and Co., we can counter the objection that we haven't read him. Also, we just might find a good quote by Lewis or somebody that redeems the time wasted in reading the book.


----------



## Ivan (Dec 31, 2004)

Jacob...your mood...Forth Eorlingas...what in the world is that?


----------



## Irishcat922 (Dec 31, 2004)

I agree Matt, but there are times when you need to read some of that stuff to stay abreast to what is being taught in mainline evangelicalism. For instance my nineteen year old Daughter told me a while back she was reading "The Prayer Of Jabez" so I read it to see what all the hype was about. My daughter asks me what I think about certain topics of interest, and I feel I need to know, how to answer her, from an informed first hand point of view. Like alot of the Charismatic issues, I have alot of family still caught up in the Charismatic Church, so I feel I need to know in context what these guys are teaching sometimes, to be able to instruct my family. So I throw out alot of bones, but it gives me some meat to chew on with people I am hopeful will come to a deeper knowledge of the truth.

By the way, I have an dear old friend I have recently been in contact with and he has been backslidden for several years, we knew each other fom the Charismatic Church we attended together. He has been telling me about all the stuff he has been reading to help him get his life back on track, Joyce Myers, Neal Anderson, I want to ease into a discussion with him on the dangers of some of these teachings, without totally discourageing him. So please be in prayer that The Lord will give me wisdom to instruct and encourage him in his faith. He is still a member of a Charismatic Church, and is really involved in the Singles ministry there. He did ask me to find him some good books to read so I think that is a good start.


----------



## fredtgreco (Dec 31, 2004)

A guy like Blackaby is worth reading because we minister to people who have never read, and will not ever read Manton or Owen, or Burroughs. We may need to read the latter group much more than the former - but I find it is much more effective to discuss Biblical doctrines with laymen using concepts in a guy like Blackaby then to tell them, "well you need to go and read Watson on this." Goo luck.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Dec 31, 2004)

I will read the bad books once and a while just to see what they actually said. It's one thing to hear someone say "Arminius said this" but quite another to read it yourself. Same with Finney. I actually find it interesting to read them, particularly Finney since he puts alot of his personality in his writing. But hen you can come back to the Finney supporter and ask him "did you know he believed this????" to their usual shock and dismay. Often evangelly fish don't know alot about the authors their pastors supposedly endorse or that the some of the guys they have read have written lots more about stuff elsewhere that they would find objectionable.


----------



## RamistThomist (Dec 31, 2004)

I agree, Patrick.
When I tell otherwise good evangelicals who are gushing over Finney that Finney believed "such and such", the battle is soon over.


----------



## fredtgreco (Dec 31, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Draught Horse_
> I agree, Patrick.
> When I tell otherwise good evangelicals who are gushing over Finney that Finney believed "such and such", the battle is soon over.



But that is harder with other broad evangelical material. Finney was a rank heretic, who denied the Fall - a Pelagian bound for hell if he persisted in his beliefs. Not so with Blackaby and others.


----------



## alwaysreforming (Dec 31, 2004)

A lot of good rationale stated so far. Let me also add that sometimes one doesn't KNOW for sure that the book is bad UNTIL one has had the opportunity to read it. Sure, the book usually doesn't fall too far from the author, but we might not retain the same right to criticize the book unless or until we have read it.

Thankfully, most of the drivel is such a quick read (because it is so content-less) that is won't waste too much of our time. I think "Wild at Heart" only took a few hours. Boy was I mad when I got to the end and realized what a waste it was!

I think the avg. contemp. evangelical's opinion of us is that we are simply stubborn, elitest, and opinionated. Until we can say that we've read such and such, I don't think its as easy to gain their trust in our critique. And as mentioned above, it does give us a point of interaction on which to relay truth and refute error. As Hank Hannegraff would say, "We can use it as a springboard or opportunity of sharing the Good News of the Gospel."


----------



## Robin (Dec 31, 2004)

Matt,

Much as I hate to bow to this truth....a TRULY educated person takes the trouble to objectively read the opposing views - rather than believing a "straw-man" position of it.

One of my worst experiences as a disciple was to read Dave Hunt's book about Calvinism. I HAD to do it - OBJECTIVELY. It was the only honorable thing to do....give me a root canal instead. But, how else can we righteously engage counter ideas?

Out here, Calvary Chapel's are teaching "hate Calvinists" classes based on Hunt's book. I once asked an opponent, _have you ever read Calvin_? With intense venom, she spewed "NO! But I KNOW he's a heretic!" Which is exactly what Hunt admits in his book.

The "intellectual bigot" route does not honor Christ. However, handling heretical material is NOT for all Christians. Those weak in the Faith must be protected - and discretion must be used. The support of strong elders and pastors is important in these cases. This is some of that "authority" we are subject to. (Our pastor taught the class on Hunt --- else, I never would have gotten through it.)

Meanwhile, since we have the Truth --- there is nothing to fear from studying a wide assortment of knowledge IF Christ has indeed led us to that calling. And also, we must reach for letting go of the sinful anger - resentment - polite rage etc., towards those who formerly led us astray and are still in sin. Christ's mercy found us - and for His grace alone, we would be there still.

As for wasting time reading - or making the most of our limited time....everyone, quick, buy and read: Mortimer Adler's "How to Read a Book".  Wow....never waste time again! For a 50 year old book, its timeless methods of how to skillfully discern reading material is unmatched. It's not about speed -- it's about WISDOM. (Oh, that I had this in college --- what time I would have saved!)

Faith Seeking Understanding,

Robin


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Dec 31, 2004)

> Much as I hate to bow to this truth....a TRULY educated person takes the trouble to objectively read the opposing views - rather than believing a "straw-man" position of it.



I'm on track with what everyone said here. That is why I said "apart from research." I agree that we should read those things as part of research and study. 

Buy Oswald Chamber for devotions? or Max Lucado?


----------



## Irishcat922 (Dec 31, 2004)

I'll take Spurgeon or Ryle for devotional reading anyday over Chambers or Lucado.


----------



## Ivan (Dec 31, 2004)

> _Originally posted by webmaster_ Buy Oswald Chamber for devotions? or Max Lucado?



I have "tasted" both, but for a regular diet I'll go with Spurgeon.


----------



## RamistThomist (Dec 31, 2004)

This part of the reason that I am reaing NT Wright on the Gospels. That and he butchers the Jesus Seminar.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Jan 1, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Ivan_
> Jacob...your mood...Forth Eorlingas...what in the world is that?



It's a quote from _The Lord of the Rings_! 

_Arise now, arise Riders of Theoden!
Dire deeds awake, dark it is eastward.
Let horse we bridled, horn be sounded!
Forth Eorlingas!_

Here's info on the movie soundtrack clip: http://www.geocities.com/magpie930/CBC_TTT/t16forth_eorlingas.htm

Here's a pic: http://www.arwenart.com/gallery/traditional/charge.html


----------



## Ivan (Jan 1, 2005)

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Ivan_
> ...



Cool. I suppose it's time to see the movie.


----------



## Bryan (Jan 1, 2005)

Is Chambers really that bad? I have a freind who likes him. Never read his stuff besides a few pages from his devotional while I was waiting for my freind. It didn't seem too bad at the time.


Do people actually read "so-so" material just to read it? When I set out to read something a lot of the time I do research into it before hand so I know I'm not going to waste my time with it.

Bryan
SDG


----------



## turmeric (Jan 1, 2005)

Hope I'm not double-posting!

There's a perfectionistic & quietistic tone to his writings. I suspect you'll find an Arminian bone in there too!


----------



## Ivan (Jan 1, 2005)

> _Originally posted by turmeric_ There's a perfectionistic & quietistic tone to his writings. I suspect you'll find an Arminian bone in there too!



Perhaps one could just spit it out. :bigsmile:


----------



## Robin (Jan 2, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Draught Horse_
> This part of the reason that I am reaing NT Wright on the Gospels. That and he butchers the Jesus Seminar.



*Heads-up* Jacob (& all)...NT Wright is veering-off into a ditch...read below! (You do know of this, yes?? Am I reading you right?)

http://www.thirdmill.org/files/english/html/nt/NT.h.Hill.Wright.html

How heart-breaking that one of the good-guys is trying to re-define Justification!!!


----------



## fredtgreco (Jan 2, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Robin_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Draught Horse_
> ...



NT Wright is not a "good guy." Hasn't been for years. This is really old news - do a search on the Board for NT Wright.


----------



## BlackCalvinist (Jan 3, 2005)

I must say that the PDC thing does have a FEW good points, as far as organization goes. One thing (as one person pointed out on another post) is definitely that Warren reminds you that we're not living in the 17th century anymore.


----------



## RamistThomist (Jan 3, 2005)

I am well aware of his Wrights ideas, but given the subject of his thread, isn't this the idea? Or is this thread only for thrashing PDL? DOn't get me wrong; we must always thrash PDL. Such inanity must not go unpunished. Honestly, I am not going to abandon the Reformed/Biblical teaching of justification. I have been raeding rereading Duncan's essay on NPP; the battle is already over; the reformed need not fear.


----------



## Robin (Jan 11, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Draught Horse_
> I am well aware of his Wrights ideas, but given the subject of his thread, isn't this the idea? Or is this thread only for thrashing PDL? DOn't get me wrong; we must always thrash PDL. Such inanity must not go unpunished. Honestly, I am not going to abandon the Reformed/Biblical teaching of justification. I have been reading rereading Duncan's essay on NPP; the battle is already over; the reformed need not fear.



Hey Jacob --

We are always in "battle" for God's ideas (2 Cor. 10) -- and these days in the REFORMED church - the Gospel is under siege! It will be so until the King Returns. The Christians' enemies are not of "flesh & blood" they are any idea that sets itself up contrary to the Gospel.

Check-out the current articles below to see what's up:

"Dangers of a Falling Church" Dr. Scott Clark
http://public.csusm.edu/public/guests/rsclark/Danger.html

Essay about Norman Shepard-former WTS prof:
http://www.banneroftruth.org/pages/articles/article_detail.php?186

The best of us could fall - we are to take care and examine our hearts to see if we are in the Faith - and to defend the true Gospel.

BTW, PDL is already revealing its true colors (another Gospel that is NO Gospel at all.) It is not simply inane, superficial stuff. It is not for us to "punish" inanity - we are to draw Swords and defend the Gospel with the Truth. Warren has attacked the TRUTH - seductively - a wolf from within the sheepfold.

Be aware, young-one and be brave! The battle is NOT over until the King appears.

Robin


----------



## Ianterrell (Jan 11, 2005)

I don't go out of my way to read lame material unless I need to for the purpose of refuting it. Most of my reading is not centered around that motive so I rarely try to read something that I feel may shrink my brain.


----------

