Rightly considering exhortations from men of God?

[VerticalLiftEnjoyer]

I've been trying to find as many Puritan sources on imagination, creativity and fiction as I could lately, and when I read McMahon's article on Harry Potter, I was shocked. Seriously? The Movies? Go read the puritans! Go read the tracts! Do you not know these "actors" commit abominations, striving against God's sovereignty by dressing up as they do? By acting as they do? This shouldn't be a question, just throw the lot of them into hell!

But as I wondered whether McMahon is compromised, and whether the Free Presbyterian Church is indeed the last hope for all mankind, I also wondered: if I looked into the Bible, would my fear-driven contempt for actors have any grounding? Would I be able to produce a twenty-eight point sermon on the evils of drama with prooftext for every paragraph? I'm only a beginning Bible student, but my options are limited. Phil. 4:8, maybe. Exodus 20:16 and Deut. 5:20, perhaps. Maybe Amos 6:5, if you ignore the commentaries.

I realize now that I've been led by the rope here, in that as I find more and more puritan sources, I mindlessly accept what they say as from God. Not, "they are ministers of God, therefore consider their word and confirm it with God's own word," but, "they are ministers of God. They speak righteousness." and nothing more. This fear of second-guessing, of confirming not only their words, but my interpretation of their words, has led me down a rabbit hole where I almost wish I'd never left Paul Washer sermon jams & MacArthur CD's. A month ago my conscience allowed listening to some modern secular music; now I can't listen to Bach.

All this self-pity aside, how do I rightly consider the words of men like the Puritans, or the Free Presbyterians, or even R.C. Sproul? How do I consider them without presumptuously tossing them aside like Jehoiakim? Or worshipping them like the Lycaonians?

God's name is abused . . . when in hearing it we conceive it to be the word of a mortal man who delivers it, rather than the word of the great God of heaven and earth, 1Thess. 2.13; and when we do not, with our hearts, believe every part and portion of that word which we read or hear, Heb. 4.2; and when we do not humbly and heartily subject ourselves to what we read or hear, 2Kings 22.19; Isa 30.9.4

(Edward Fisher, "The Marrow of Modern Divinity" (modernized))

 

[Polanus1561]

and whether the Free Presbyterian Church is indeed the last hope for all mankind,

Do they even think of themselves in this way?

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

My best advice is to seek godly counsel in person from experienced Reformed men in your locality. I cannot emphasise in person enough, as you seem to live too much of your life on the internet. One thing that I have always found odd about people who seem to have a troubled conscience about everything else is how they justify using, of all things, the internet. Just think for a moment about the enormous evils to which the internet has given birth. And yet most of us can distinguish between the right use of the internet from its abuse. Why not apply the same logic to other things?

 

[Solparvus]

My best advice is to seek godly counsel in person from experienced Reformed men in your locality. I cannot emphasise in person enough, as you seem to live too much of your life on the internet. One thing that I have always found odd about people who seem to have a troubled conscience about everything else is how they justify using, of all things, the internet. Just think for a moment about the enormous evils to which the internet has given birth. And yet most of us can distinguish between the right use of the internet from its abuse. Why not apply the same logic to other things?

Indeed. If you're looking for sorrows, one of the best things you can do is get on Facebook.

As one professor said to me, the best theological discussions take place in the church courts. You can extend that to the local congregational level amongst pastors, elders, and people.

To the OP: Take this seriously. Go to your pastors with these things.

 

[No Other Name]

I heartily agree with everyone else here. It is one thing to get guidance on where to look or how to proceed if stuck, but you seem to want to use this forum as the foundation for a wholesale philosophy/theology of frankly very big issues.

And when you do engage with those online, please be fair and understand everyone before making conclusions. I honestly think you are trying to do that yet you still seem to have blind spots.

For example, when you said:

when I read McMahon's article on Harry Potter, I was shocked. Seriously? The Movies? Go read the puritans! Go read the tracts!

I was curious. Was McMahon encouraging going to the movies? I wouldn't have thought that, but I wanted to read for myself. He - of course - was not. He did exhort us as men to be aware of the content and message of any entertainment sources - particularly those which become so popular that our family members cannot help but be exposed to these franchises as a matter of fact in this fallen world.

After dismissing content as any indicator of avoidance (outside of gratuitous parameters - and no one can reasonably accuse Harry Potter of being gratuitous in violence or sexuality), he proceeded to pick apart the feeling that any average moviegoer could not reasonably hate witchcraft after seeing these movies.

He also helpfully addressed the confusing morality of the message of Harry Potter - rightly judging that the moral relativism infecting every character including - and especially - the heroes leaves this as a franchise that is indeed to be marked and avoided.

As someone ignorant of the franchise, I found his write-up to be far more illuminating and edifying than "witchcraft is bad" or "actors are immoral hedonists and don't deserve our support". None of the previous quotes are wrong per se, but they are certainly less than helpful if any father out there back in the day faced children who are naturally curious to the point of distraction re: Harry Potter and joining friends in talking about what happened and chattering about the next release etc.

Finally, McMahon does indeed point out that movies et al are far less meat for families than what is truly foundational for our children and also us.

His final sentence sums it up very well:

"Better yet, we should encourage fathers to take the time to study their bible’s, digest the material in the bible, and teach their children as the head of the home. Maybe we would have fewer trips to the movies, or to the video stores, if this were so."

After reading this and then going back to your original consternation about McMahon's review, I think you are very confused and need to talk with someone one-on one like these brothers suggest.

If everyone around you is not helpful in this regard, maybe you want to talk privately one-on-one with someone you admire online? Privately. Point by point. And prayerfully every step of the way.

May God bless you as you work through this issue.

 

[RamistThomist]

Remember: The outward and ordinary means whereby Christ communicateth to us the benefits of redemption, are his ordinances, especially the word, sacraments, and prayer; all which are made effectual to the elect for salvation.

This means in person church hearing sermons and receiving the means of grace. That trumps any argument on whether the Free Church is pure enough.

 

[VerticalLiftEnjoyer]

My best advice is to seek godly counsel in person from experienced Reformed men in your locality. I cannot emphasise in person enough, as you seem to live too much of your life on the internet. One thing that I have always found odd about people who seem to have a troubled conscience about everything else is how they justify using, of all things, the internet. Just think for a moment about the enormous evils to which the internet has given birth. And yet most of us can distinguish between the right use of the internet from its abuse. Why not apply the same logic to other things?

No use. The only church nearby who has a pastor and congregation that I can trust with something like this is too far for me to drive, and I’ve tried getting in contact many times. I don’t like using the internet as a pastor but I haven’t been able to leave my house for about 5 months. (Also my conscience does curse me for watching YouTube videos if that means anything)

After reading this and then going back to your original consternation about McMahon's review, I think you are very confused and need to talk with someone one-on one like these brothers suggest

Less about him watching movies and more about him not attacking movies in general. After seeing so many attacks on it from many puritans, I was amazed that a man whom I thought would carry on their strict legacy didn’t attack the idea of a movie outright. This led me to wonder if he knew something I didn’t, hence this thread.

Also I don’t have many options. I don’t really want to impose myself on anyone here (you don’t have to reply to this so you can leave when you want, not so with PM’s) and the only pastor whom I trust is two states away and going through many cross right now. (And also has to deal with 20 people like me)

 

[RamistThomist]

I don’t like using the internet as a pastor but I haven’t been able to leave my house for about 5 months. (Also my conscience does curse me for watching YouTube videos if that means anything)

If you aren't able to leave the house, then finding a church seems to be a moot point. Whatever happens, even if unavoidable, learning theology from the internet is almost always a disaster. It rarely ends well, even if you only look at the super-pure theologians.

 

[Ryan&Amber2013]

For many of us, whether it be being new to Christianity, the puritans, or Calvinism, we can easily become zealots, who are highly opinionated, critical, and dogmatic of anything and everything. If I were you, I would recommend being rock solid and firm on the essentials, and for secondary issues, have your stance and your practice, but be open to reason and graceful with others. Everything doesn't have to be a dividing line. As Paul says, all things are permissible but not all things are beneficial. A lot of life is just using Biblical wisdom, which others may interpret differently, and so long as they are using the Scriptures to justify their position, that's okay. You want the way you represent Christianity to be as attractive and beautiful as possible.

As far as the more specifics of what you were writing about, I don't think there is a pastor or author I have ever read that I fully agree with. And I have never known anybody that agrees with everything I say or think. But I have found the puritans to be the most accurate. Though some paragraphs I'm thinking "no, I don't agree with that." I think they are the best, but imperfect for sure. Use wisdom to sort it all out. Really be in the Scriptures and rely on the Spirit. Men do help, but they are not God.

 

[py3ak]

I haven’t been able to leave my house for about 5 months.

Why is that?

 

[JTB.SDG]

I'm not sure I entirely follow you. I'd recommend reading through some of Tim Keller's materiel on engaging with culture as what you're referring to fits into that discussion. I believe (with Keller) that Scripture calls us to both affirm and challenge our culture in every area. Because man was made in God's image, there are things in every culture (IE, the arts) that we can and ought to celebrate; because of the fall there are things in every culture that are stained with the fall and sin. I don't think you have Scriptural warrant to throw out an entire area of culture like film/movies as inherently evil.

 

[VerticalLiftEnjoyer]

Why is that?

Mother had a stroke. I tried going to church after the matter but had to leave halfway through the service because she couldn’t sit that long. Also don’t have a driver’s license, so now that she’s okay, I nevertheless can’t get anywhere.

 

[RamistThomist]

If you can't go to a church right now, what exactly are you hoping for? Ideally, an average (just average) Reformed congregation would have elders who could provide you guidance. They don't need to be super soldiers. Ordinary is okay.

 

[VerticalLiftEnjoyer]

If you can't go to a church right now, what exactly are you hoping for? Ideally, an average (just average) Reformed congregation would have elders who could provide you guidance. They don't need to be super soldiers. Ordinary is okay.

The church that I am affiliated with (the one in the signature) isn’t theologically sound. I brought this up in my “Removing idols?” thread: they just brush off my concerns. Very Arminian.

 

[MChase]

The church that I am affiliated with (the one in the signature) isn’t theologically sound. I brought this up in my “Removing idols?” thread: they just brush off my concerns. Very Arminian.

I believe there is a sound PCA congregation in Evansville; I'd go there.

 

[arapahoepark]

If you can't go to a church right now, what exactly are you hoping for? Ideally, an average (just average) Reformed congregation would have elders who could provide you guidance. They don't need to be super soldiers. Ordinary is okay.

Indeed.

I have to say I love your avatar.

 

[jwithnell]

If you are having to be home, how about consistently "going" to one church via livestream? The continuity would be helpful, if the church preaches verse by verse rather than topically.

 

[py3ak]

Mother had a stroke. I tried going to church after the matter but had to leave halfway through the service because she couldn’t sit that long. Also don’t have a driver’s license, so now that she’s okay, I nevertheless can’t get anywhere.

That sounds like you're in a tough situation. Youth and isolation can both easily lapse into thinking that more extreme = more true or more pure. And indeed, some people are drawn to the Puritans precisely on that score: they think or feel that here, finally, are the people who were strict enough to get it right.

But that's not quite correct. For one thing, not all Puritans are entirely on board with one another. And where there is very broad agreement, it's also the case that their contexts of ministry were more similar to one another than to ours. Moreover, their laments about sin were not pro forma; there were serious problems in the congregations they served, as subsequent history validates extensively.

More importantly, Paul has told us that pressing further in a particular direction is not always wise. For instance, Colossians 2:18-23; Romans 14:1-15:6; Titus 1:15. We don't want to look back when we put our hands to the plow; but as trees of the Lord we don't want all our branches to be on one side only of the trunk.

Since you're able to read the Puritans without apparent difficulty, I would suggest a couple of thoughts to help with that balance. One, read the Puritans who were known for being helpful to those with sensitive consciences: Richard Sibbes, Thomas Goodwin, and Walter Marshall are at the top of my pile in that regard (though adding in Thomas Manton or Stephen Charnock would not be bad at all). Second, read other edifying literature as well. The whole of church history is open to you, but at least add the 18th century, where Dr. Lloyd-Jones always found relief when he was tired. From those years, John Newton is beneficial in a way that few have ever equaled.

 

[Travis Fentiman]

Here is a webpage of reformed resources defending the lawfulness of some plays, acting, fiction, etc.:

On Theater, Stage-Plays, Movies, Acting, etc.​

 

[TheInquirer]

I'm only a beginning Bible student

What I would recommend is commit to reading through the Bible and growing in maturity and focusing on the bigger issues in the Christian life rather than obsessing about movies (unless they are some of addiction for you). There are bigger fish to fry and as you grow in maturity and love for God, many issues start to take care of themselves.

If you can find options for your mother so you can go to school, get a job, go to church etc - that would be helpful so you can grow and develop as an individual.

 

[CathH]

It would be a terrible mistake to think that the Free Presbyterian Church is the last hope for all mankind. On the question of how you rightly consider them (or, if this is all you're going on, one copy-and-paste article from their magazine from the 1930s) or the Puritans or RC Sproul - I'd follow the advice that others have given you on here. If you can't have quality in-person input, read balanced Puritan treatments of worldliness in general, or conscience in general.

As you go along, it might be helpful to remember that what may seem a very attractive and easy-to-apply rule (e.g., Ban All Novels) will probably disintegrate when it comes into contact with the diversity of people, times and places that Christianity has to speak to. There is self-pleasing worldliness in extreme asceticism as much as in reckless hedonism, although the kind of people who write articles recommending it tend to be able to make it sound very pious.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

Indeed.

I have to say I love your avatar.

I was wondering why you were so infatuated with John Davenant, then I looked again.