Wake up.

[turmeric]

Originally posted by Jeremy
Do you understand what conversion is? Do you know what it means to be turned from darkness to light? Do you have the mind of Christ? Have you experienced the saving power of Christ?

So far I have stayed out of this and perhaps I should continue to do so. For one thing, I don't want to be misconstrued as defending movies like Eyes Wide Shut or death metal, which I personally can't stand.

Having said that, however, I'd be interested in your answer to your own questions, Jeremy. What is your definition of conversion? What would indicate "having the mind of Christ" to you? You are quite correct that Christians should be moving away from salacious movies and music and more toward the good, the true, and the beautiful. (Phillippians 4:8). There are some things we shouldn't even be thinking about, let alone discussing. However, some of your posts are frankly giving me Wesleyan flashbacks. Not because you're saying some movies are bad, but this language about sanctification which seems to indicate that once you're saved, it should be a done deal, no more sin, no more struggle. I hope that's not what you mean.

 

[Ravens]

Wowie Zowie !

For starters:

"Chris, first of all, due to not only your activities you have chosen to engage in, but moreso your attitude toward someone who is confronting you about it, I challenge you to reconsider who it is you serve."

* Chris's * attitude? His?? Errrr... I've been combing through these posts with my official Tom Cruise E-meter, and have definitely picked up some seriously foul attitude-vibes in this thread... but they weren't really coming from Chris...

Honestly this thread kind of blows my mind. You don't just express concern or anything, you offer indicative statements about a person's spiritual life that you've never met. "You ARE dreaming if you think you are a Christian". Or when you reference his "wicked lifestyle." Or when you say the people you disagree with are dogs returned to their vomit.

And due to the way this thread has evolved, and how that relates to the general milieu and tenor of this board, this thread has now been semi-cast in the following way: Disagree with Jeremy, and you are supporting Eyes Wide Shut and various and sundry other Bacchanalian perversions, OR support the Puritans, and godliness, and sanctification.

That's purposefully hyperbolic, but I think its semi-accurate. Webmaster's approval of the thread probably helped in that regard (not evaluating that one way or the other, but that's how a higher up's approval usually functions). And I think its evident in the fact that anyone who replies to you now has to mention and make clear that they don't support Eyes Wide Shut.

But I still think you are operating out of a Frank Peretti view of Satanic influence. When you finally busted out your treasure trove of insight and hit us up with some knowledge as to "metal", you pretty much said that people who listen to metal are weird goombas who walk around in black shirts.

And as I've said before, I worry far more about "Satanic" influence in Jessica Simpson and other seemingly "vanilla" musicians than I do in metal. Even many cultural, unregenerate, American "Christians" aren't really going to be tempted to reject God and tattoo a pentagram on their forehead. Self-righteousness, materialism, and nicely packaged sensuality are much more dangerous and Trojan-horse like to most people.

But would you have similar rage against CMT, Honky Tonk, "let's get drunk and make out" songs?

I don't know your motives. I can guess. Unlike you, I don't offer indicative, ex cathedra statements as to people's spiritual state without having met them. Come to think, I don't do that even when I have met them.

But it seems as if you're just picking an easy target and making a name for yourself. I wonder if you would have the same reaction if you had found McMahon's or Bushey's movie selections unpalatable.

And I'm not impugning the moderators here (since I'd wager they are reading)... just making a point. We all know who the big wigs are, the professors and ministers. And they have that position on the board for a reason. I mean, I lend more credence to what they say as well. Then you have the via media, the people who are still highly credible, but not "their word is oak" level... and lastly, the minions, the hobbits, and simple folk.

I seriously doubt you would have levied such an accusation against the Elronds of the board.

But here's a hypothetical... I remember a year ago, Matt & Scott said they went to see the movie Constantine w/Keanu Reeves. Now, when I read that, I was like, "Ehhhh..."

Certainly no reaction that you are having. Its just something I wouldn't personally see. Weird Romish demon-killing and what not. I personally don't like movies that use demons as entertainment. However, I realize that some movies I like are just as tempting in other ways, and viral, and realized they might have different preferences, and chalked it up to "none of my business."

Now... would you have started a post like this against them? All of your John Knox-ness aside, I daresay not. And now that I've expressed that to you, are you now going to go on a crusade against them?

Andrew (V.H.) likes some Beatles and Pink Floyd songs. And we all know that Aleister Crowley was on the cover of Sgt. Peppers. And, of course, every teenage shroom-head has the obligatory Dark Side of the Moon poster on his wall.

I GUARANTEE you that if I had started a thread and said that Andrew was a dog who had returned to his vomit, and was dreaming if he was a Christian, and that the Beatles were influenced by Aleister Crowley, psychedelics, and Indian mysticism, and then capped it off with some prima donna "Choose ye this day whom ye will serve", I would have been roundly pimp-smacked by everyone on the board.

But since its someone who is not as well known, with an "easier" (Frank Peretti) target, then its "no biggie", and we need more threads like it, yadda yadda.

And just f.y.i., Andrew, I've never interacted with you, but I have an immense amount of respect for you. Just like my examples with the webmaster, I'm just making a point. Your reputation precedes you, and honestly, you were one of the small points of sanity for me when I first came to this board... as in, you reassured me someone could be Sabbatarian, E.P., and still have like... ya' know, a sense of humor.



The beat of metal is Satanic? I dunno. I get the same prideful, macho feelings from Ride of the Valkyries. And you do realize that there is oodles of metal that isn't "Satanic", at least in your Star Wars since, right? And *my* conscience isn't pricked, because I don't even like metal that much ! Go through my ipod and you'll find more Waylon Jennings and folk Irish music... but its the principle that irks me.

But anyway. I agree with Peter, that most movies are brain poison. I think Hollywood has done *inestimable* damage to society. I think explicitly blasphemous music of any kind should be avoided. But for the life of me I see your attitude as more of a danger than Chris's music.

I mean maybe I'm the only one. I know its not "cool" to say, since I'm obviously a libertine by disagreeing with you. But seriously. Some people on this board are certainly acting like Balaam's transportation.

 

[ReformedWretch]

Joshua

I agree that the ORIGINAL post and maybe one or two after words were a little over the top in how they were written. However, this post of yours makes the same mistake in my opinion.

As for mods, big-wigs, minions (what am I by the way? Just curious) Matt had already weighed in with his thoughts and they seemed rather supportive.

 

[crhoades]

Obligatory WCF post as it hasn't happened yet. Not aimed at any one person on this thread but for the mutual edification of all. Just want to encourage everyone to speak the truth in love.

Chapter XX

Of Christian Liberty, and Liberty of Conscience

I. The liberty which Christ has purchased for believers under the Gospel consists in their freedom from the guilt of sin, and condemning wrath of God, the curse of the moral law;[1] and, in their being delivered from this present evil world, bondage to Satan, and dominion of sin;[2] from the evil of afflictions, the sting of death, the victory of the grace, and everlasting damnation;[3] as also, in their free access to God,[4] and their yielding obedience unto Him, not out of slavish fear, but a child-like love and willing mind.[5] All which were common also to believers under the law.[6] But, under the New Testament, the liberty of Christians is further enlarged, in their freedom from the yoke of the ceremonial law, to which the Jewish Church was subjected;[7] and in greater boldness of access to the throne of grace,[8] and in fuller communications of the free Spirit of God, than believers under the law did ordinarily partake of.[9]

II. God alone is Lord of the conscience,[10] and has left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are, in any thing, contrary to His Word; or beside it, if matters of faith, or worship.[11] So that, to believe such doctrines, or to obey such commands, out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of conscience:[12] and the requiring of an implicit faith, and an absolute and blind obedience, is to destroy liberty of conscience, and reason also.[13]

III. They who, upon pretence of Christian liberty, do practice any sin, or cherish any lust, do thereby destroy the end of Christian liberty, which is, that being delivered out of the hands of our enemies, we might serve the Lord without fear, in holiness and righteousness before Him, all the days of our life.[14]

IV. And because the powers which God has ordained, and the liberty which Christ has purchased are not intended by God to destroy, but mutually to uphold and preserve one another, they who, upon pretence of Christian liberty, shall oppose any lawful power, or the lawful exercise of it, whether it be civil or ecclesiastical, resist the ordinance of God.[15] And, for their publishing of such opinions, or maintaining of such practices, as are contrary to the light of nature, or to the known principles of Christianity (whether concerning faith, worship, or conversation), or to the power of godliness; or, such erroneous opinions or practices, as either in their own nature, or in the manner of publishing or maintaining them, are destructive to the external peace and order which Christ has established in the Church, they may lawfully be called to account,[16] and proceeded against, by the censures of the Church. and by the power of the civil magistrate.[17]

| Previous

[Edited on 8-31-2006 by crhoades]

 

[Puritanhead]

sits and watches the show.

 

[jaybird0827]

Originally posted by crhoades
Obligatory WCF post as it hasn't happened yet. Not aimed at any one person on this thread but for the mutual edification of all. Just want to encourage everyone to speak the truth in love.
. . .

Here is a link to an online version of the confession. It includes links to the Scripture proof texts.

 

[crhoades]

Originally posted by jaybird0827

Originally posted by crhoades
Obligatory WCF post as it hasn't happened yet. Not aimed at any one person on this thread but for the mutual edification of all. Just want to encourage everyone to speak the truth in love.
. . .

Here is a link to an online version of the confession. It includes links to the Scripture proof texts.

Thanks! That's were I copied it from in a hurry...From a quick read of the topic, I surmise that we have 2 groups: one leaning more on section 2 making sure the other does it justice and the other leaning toward section 3. Let's all be charitable toward one another and not sin all the more that grace may abound nor discount the liberty that we've been given.

 

[Ravens]

I fail to see how mine makes the same mistake. There is a huge difference between "Balaam's transportation" and saying, indicatively, that someone is dreaming if they think they are a Christian, that they live a wicked lifestyle, and on and on.

But I guess commenting on personalities is the same as saying someone is going to Hell.

I just think its a shame that no one is pointing it out. I've never even exchanged a u2u with Chris or talked to him, but I generally feel sorry for him that these things are being said about him on a public message board read by ministers, professors, and others. Especially when, just according to the philosophical issues (sans sensationalism), the same charges could be levied against most people here.

I mean... whatever. I guess I'm the only one. I'll just go sit in the corner and mutter "the emperor has no clothes" to myself for the rest of the day. Or self-lobotomize and change my style of posting. Ya' know, that sterilized, Reformed message board "agape" posting that is just oozing with disdain and dislike to the point that it hurts your eyeballs, but never actually comes out and says it.

:bigsmile:

 

[BobVigneault]

Not \"Wake Up\" but \"Shake Up\"

Jeremy, thank you for your post, it has taken the board members into a neighborhood that we rarely go into as a group. We all wrestle with personal convictions and personal apllications in our everyday lives but we don't do a lot of comparing and contrasting of our convictions with one another.

You're call to 'wake up' implies that there is a spiritual blindness among the members when in reality it is a matter of 'emphasis'.

For the most part, as a board we deal in sytematic theology and confessions against a back drop of redemptive history. We also deal with the big issues that the church has struggled with in the last 100 years. They are important issues that are controversial because in most cases our confessions don't explicitly address them. Let me name a few:

exclusive Psalmody, contemporary worship, theonomy, new perspectives on justification, common grace, VanTillian vs. Clarkian apologetics, paedo-communion.

These are topics that have drawn very definite lines of battle. At times we have made these the external tests of orthodoxy and we have accused fellow believers of heresy and apostasy. The point is we are very similar in our passion for biblical truth and devotion to purity in worship.

Becasue of our emphasis on redemptive history we don't spend as much time discussing ethics and moralism. Oh, regarding the sabbath we've gotten quite vigilant at times but these matters of ethical living have not been our emphasis.

You have come along with a very different emphasis and you made the test for a true believer a measure of ones personal convictions. The Scriptures certainly teach the importance of personal behavior, ie. Proverbs, Sermon on the Mount, but in our group these passages receive a weaker emphasis.

I believe that each member here takes personal holy living as very important and has wrestled with his christian liberty and carnality, but please don't assume that because we haven't emphasized these matters that there is some kind of anti-nomian or licentious spirit a foot. Our obedience is our response of gratitude to Christ's redemption. We are sanctified but not perfected. We are of the same spirit and on the same path but not at the same place on the path.

Your admonition to examine ourselves is welcome and productive. We need to step aside from our theological and ecclesiological debates on occassion and do this as a group. So I would change your initial title for this thread from "Wake Up" to "Shake Up". We are awake but sometimes we lose our fizz. Blessings.

 

[Ravens]

I agree, Bob.

Though I think his approach endangers Christian liberty, as I've said in every post of mine (or at least 2 out of 3), I think it supremely important to guard our minds. Just given as a warning and admonition about the dangers of entertainment, I have zero problems with it.

If I came across as too harsh, I apologize (I personally don't think I did, but I'm open to being mistaken ). I just don't like seeing one or two board members getting publicly browbeaten because they enjoy a form of music that's an "easy target". Especially when this browbeating and jeremiad is set against a backdrop of veritable silence from the rest of the board.

I don't think many others would appreciate being called dreaming, wicked dogs if it was *their* favorite kind of debateable music being anathematized in the o.p.

That's all I'm saying. I have zero problems with "guard your mind, guard your heart, there's a lot of trash out there" and fifty fafillion gazillion problems with "if you like this, you are wicked person who clearly has not received the Holy Spirit."

That's all I'm sayin'.



[Edited on 8-31-2006 by Mudandstars]

Both edits for spelling and grammar... nothin' else.



[Edited on 8-31-2006 by Mudandstars]

 

[Craig]

I'm taking back my previous post...I did like the content of what I referred to...but I wonder if I misinterpreted Jeremy...

Jeremy,
I recommend you fog a mirror on your next rebuke.

 

[bradofshaw]

III. They who, upon pretence of Christian liberty, do practice any sin, or cherish any lust, do thereby destroy the end of Christian liberty, which is, that being delivered out of the hands of our enemies, we might serve the Lord without fear, in holiness and righteousness before Him, all the days of our life.[14]

Let's all take this into consideration. I think that most of us have admitted that we sin in these areas at times. However, let me humbly point out that Jeremy has not demonstrated any specific sin, except perhaps "the appearance of evil."

As to some of the responses in this thread, I can only say I'm sorry you feel that telling someone they're headed for trouble when they are is wrong. Isn't that true love? If I saw my son out in the road with a Mack truck coming his way at 65 MPH, I think the loving thing would be to let him know. How is it then that I am an evil Pharisee for telling you the truth?

The problem is, some of the admonitions you gave were clearly misguided, and the judgments you have made about the salvation and sanctification of your brothers were ill-informed at best. Even if someone on this board were clearly demonstrating a sinful lifestyle which were inappropriate for a child of Christ, we still must remember to speak the truth in love.

And you know what? Good Christians are going to disagree on Megadeth. Good Christians on this board disagree on The Chronicles of Narnia. I agree we need more discussion and accountability on matters of personal living. It is a GREAT idea to discuss how we spend our time, what entertainment we fill our minds with, and what appearance we give the world by these things, so that we can better keep each other accountable. However, I don't think I need to say anything more about the spirit in which this discussion was started. It speaks for itself.

Maybe it can end more charitably?

 

[Pilgrim]

My taking issue with some aspects of Mr. Walsh's posts appears to have somewhat clouded the issue here. The fact is that Mr. Walsh's denunciation of the entertainment forums was aimed at the entire board, including (perhaps especially) the moderators and administrators.

Mr. Walsh's view seems to clearly be, watch a movie or listen to anything but gospel music or the Psalms and you're returning to your own vomit. Is someone playing X-box? Deliver him to Satan. To the man who takes his kids to the baseball game, Mr. Walsh's response is, you're in danger of the hell fire. Any participation in any of these activities is tantamount to apostasy and falling from grace in Mr. Walsh's mind.

Rather than continue to and post something else that will likely generate more heat than light, I'll let my last post stand as my final substantive post in this thread. Mr. Walsh's failure to interact with it, and the manner in which he responded, both in substance and in spirit, speaks for itself.

This is a long thread, so for the sake of convenience I will reproduce the substance of what I wrote earlier here:

Mr. Walsh,

So far you have offered us no argument other than the opinion of yourself and your father that ever engaging in what you label "worldly" activities (which you have yet to define) is intrinsically evil and sinful. I'm open to correction, but the "everybody knows" argument is going over like a lead balloon over here.

Many cults speak of the power of Jesus blood. Legalism in its various forms seldom denies the power of the blood outright, it simply annexes various works to it. As Fred stated, legalism is preaching that you have to do x or not do y or you are not saved.

I will be the first to admit that I have often failed to cultivate personal holiness and have been too little concerned with it. Again, I agree with you up to a point regarding entertainment. Are these things often unprofitable? Yes. Is whatever profit that may occasionally be gleaned from them usually better expressed elsewhere? Yes. Are there better ways to redeem the time? In general, yes. Had your comments been presented in that way, there would have been little or no argument from myself or anyone else. But when you say that it is sinful in and of itself to listen to "worldly music" (which is a broad enough category to include Beethoven) and other "worldly entertainments" and attempt to bind the conscience beyond scripture, repeatedly suggesting that no one who has received the Holy Spirit could be involved in such activities, I am compelled to respond for the sake of the gospel.

[Edited on 8-31-2006 by Pilgrim]

 

[Pilgrim]

Mr. Walsh's Original Post:

Originally posted by Jeremy
I have perused the 'entertainment' section of this web site, especially this movie forum, and quite frankly all I can say is that I'm disappointed in every one of you.
[CP: emphasis added]

Perhaps you've forgotten the scriptures? 'Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world...'

Movies, sports, worldly music...these are all things I enjoyed before Christ in his mercy rescued me from this world. But you are like dogs returned to your own vomit.

What matters most to you? How can you spend such precious time in service to yourselves and to God's enemies while claiming to be new creatures in Christ? Old things should be passed away and all things become new.

I encourage you to examine your hearts.

Mr. Walsh responds to a question from Adam:

Originally posted by Jeremy

Originally posted by houseparent
So a Christian cannot ever go to a movie, football game, or listen to a secular CD?

....ever?

Depends on your definition of 'Christian'. Are you speaking of a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ, or are you speaking of something else?

[Edited on 8-31-2006 by Pilgrim]

 

[Puritanhead]

sits and wonders why this thread operates like the Energizer bunny. It keeps going and going and going.

 

[turmeric]

I hereby kill this thread! Let it die with dignity, Ryan!

 

[caddy]

Or....someone could just "pimp smack" you and put you out of your misery!

Sorry, I had to laugh when I read your above post Mudanstars.

Personally I am thoroughly enjoying this thread.

Jeremy's admitted that he might need a refresher course on speaking the truth in love--and I might add "tact" but I have taken the rebuke to heart. Do we have liberty? Absolutely. I have come to personally enjoy more liberties ( the occasional drink being just one example ) since examining what is scriptural and what is not. But what I have thoroughly enjoyed about Jermemy's post is the simplicity of it all: A cry in the wilderness to exam yourselves, examine your heart. Where are you--personally--in Christ. Are we living Holy lives or not, or are we just looking for more ways to enjoy this world and the obvious liberties we have in Christ?!

A fine balancing act we have brothers and sisters in Christ, but nonetheless, I am enjoying seeing the excellent comments being made on both sides.

Originally posted by Mudandstars
I fail to see how mine makes the same mistake. There is a huge difference between "Balaam's transportation" and saying, indicatively, that someone is dreaming if they think they are a Christian, that they live a wicked lifestyle, and on and on.

But I guess commenting on personalities is the same as saying someone is going to Hell.

I just think its a shame that no one is pointing it out. I've never even exchanged a u2u with Chris or talked to him, but I generally feel sorry for him that these things are being said about him on a public message board read by ministers, professors, and others. Especially when, just according to the philosophical issues (sans sensationalism), the same charges could be levied against most people here.

I mean... whatever. I guess I'm the only one. I'll just go sit in the corner and mutter "the emperor has no clothes" to myself for the rest of the day. Or self-lobotomize and change my style of posting. Ya' know, that sterilized, Reformed message board "agape" posting that is just oozing with disdain and dislike to the point that it hurts your eyeballs, but never actually comes out and says it.

:bigsmile:

 

[jaybird0827]

Originally posted by turmeric
I hereby kill this thread! Let it die with dignity, Ryan!

You tried. Now it's my turn. I'm usually pretty good at doing this.






[size=-2]... ... another thread bites the dust ... another thread bites the dust ... another thread bites ... another thread bites ...[/size]