Why Read Fiction?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I enjoyed the fiction of Richard P. Belcher who uses his books to teach sound biblical doctrines, the doctrines of grace, eschatology and others. I enjoyed the 'Journey' series and feel they are a great help to young people or those just learning of calvinism. Journey into Grace, and the others I found very clear in their teaching. Though fiction he does a great job of teaching the sound doctrines we love! http://www.richbarrypress.com/
 
How many of us can name the top books in American life at the moment?

Here's my top-of-the-head 10 list for American Literature:

1. Moby-Dick
2. Huck-Finn
3. Scarlet Letter
4. Light in August
5. Great Gatsby
6. Short Stories of Flannery O'Connor
7. Death of a Salesman
8. Beloved
9. To Kill A Mockingbird
10. Walden

*edit* I should probably add more Faulkner to this list . . . what do you folks think?
 
Last edited:
Here's my top-of-the-head 10 list for American Literature:

1. Moby-Dick
2. Huck-Finn
3. Scarlet Letter
4. Light in August
5. Great Gatsby
6. Short Stories of Flannery O'Connor
7. Death of a Salesman
8. Beloved
9. To Kill A Mockingbird
10. Walden

*edit* I should probably add more Faulkner to this list . . . what do you folks think?

Yes to Faulkner.

I've read all of those except Beloved and Light in August. Walden, Huck-Finn, and Moby Dick all influenced my formative years tremendously.

I think Jacob may have been thinking about contemporary fiction, though, as in Harry Potter etc. I'd be surprised if the books you have listed are influencing many young people today. Maybe Mockingbird.
 
Where did you get the phrase "bring us to God" and where did the requirement for whatever that means come from?

I'm not sure if I'm answering your question, but, like I was saying in my earlier post, if we believe God is the spring of all good if we follow up any stream it will lead us to Him if the stream is good. If we can trace down the emanation of good from God we can follow it back to him. I believe it's true but I don't claim any knowledge; maybe there's a wise person who knows differently. Eg. we eat and drink to nourish our bodies, we nourish our bodies to live, we live to worship, we worship to experience union with God. That's something like what I mean, not to imply necessarily that the sole purpose of life is worship or even that this sequence is correct.

in my opinion to enjoy fiction (or anything) for its own sake is to love the creature more than the creator. How do we enjoy fiction for God sake or enjoy God through fiction? "For from him and through him and to him are all thing. To the glory of God. Amen."
 
Thoreau was humanist, was he not? Nice sounding words, but totally fixed on his own ideation, lacking in credit to the creator, just enjoying the created!
 
Oh sorry... it is because what you said was so much deeper than what had been said (at least by me) previously. I was pretending to be as smart and purposefully failing miserably.

Got it! ;) Thanks for the compliment; sorry I was too dense to get it!
 
I'm not sure if I'm answering your question, but, like I was saying in my earlier post, if we believe God is the spring of all good if we follow up any stream it will lead us to Him if the stream is good. If we can trace down the emanation of good from God we can follow it back to him. I believe it's true but I don't claim any knowledge; maybe there's a wise person who knows differently. Eg. we eat and drink to nourish our bodies, we nourish our bodies to live, we live to worship, we worship to experience union with God. That's something like what I mean, not to imply necessarily that the sole purpose of life is worship or even that this sequence is correct.

in my opinion to enjoy fiction (or anything) for its own sake is to love the creature more than the creator. How do we enjoy fiction for God sake or enjoy God through fiction? "For from him and through him and to him are all thing. To the glory of God. Amen."

Because we can glorify God by using our minds to interact with current streams in culture. I understand what we are saying, but it runs the risk of extreme introspection on everything we do.
 
in my opinion to enjoy fiction (or anything) for its own sake is to love the creature more than the creator.

While I agree with the spirit behind this statement and certainly hope to emulate it in my daily life, I am wondering if you are reading too much into things. God gave us good things to enjoy (1 Tim 6:17) and while we must never love pleasure more than God or forget to be thankful to God for the good gifts he provides, I am not sure I see in the bible that to enjoy something simply because it is enjoyable is sin. The 'enjoyability' of that thing and our ability to enjoy is, it seems to me, presented in the bible as a gift from God to be appreciated, even if it must be kept in its proper place in life.
 
Thoreau was humanist, was he not? Nice sounding words, but totally fixed on his own ideation, lacking in credit to the creator, just enjoying the created!

Yes, of course he was. A transcendentalist at that. It is important to know that going in.

Nevertheless, he taught me as a young pagan to look at the world in a big way. Ants weren't just ants, they were armies; a small pond was not just a body of water, but a reflection of history and creation; etc. He also showed me the advantage of trying to live as a minimalist: how owning few possessions assists freedom to think and owning much can make one a slave to possessions. It led to interesting experiments.

And mostly, he taught me how to think passionately and even dramatically about the most mundane things. Even more interestingly, his quotations from scripture led me to read the Bible.

So we can learn things from the humanists. Some of them were quite good at seeing things we ignore.
 
Yes, of course he was. A transcendentalist at that. It is important to know that going in.

Nevertheless, he taught me as a young pagan to look at the world in a big way. Ants weren't just ants, they were armies; a small pond was not just a body of water, but a reflection of history and creation; etc. He also showed me the advantage of trying to live as a minimalist: how owning few possessions assists freedom to think and owning much can make one a slave to possessions. It led to interesting experiments.

And mostly, he taught me how to think passionately and even dramatically about the most mundane things. Even more interestingly, his quotations from scripture led me to read the Bible.

So we can learn things from the humanists. Some of them were quite good at seeing things we ignore.


Loved your post and how you gained benefit from a pagan! You're so right, that our vision should be unlimited and yet to view all through a biblical worldview! I certainly agree also about the snare of materialism and how it enslaves one, almost prohibiting sight of the glories of creation itself!
Blessings and thanks!
 
All I can really say about reading fiction is that there are alot of good books out there fiction and non. They stimulate thought and entertain in a way that TV never could.
 
True about "Walden" I just happened to buy several books at Barnes & Nobles that were classics. It was like buy 2 get 1 free or something. I bought "Walden", "Alice In Wonderland" & "Grimm Brothers Fairy Tales". Not sure why i bought those. Must have been in a weird mood & I know I'd read most of the others.
 
One of the things that makes reading good fiction so entertaining is that, in talented hands, it gives the author a chance to sound off on topics that interest him right in the midst of his narrative.

This is taken from Chapter 11 of Anthony Trollope's (1815-1882) novel The Way We Live Now (1875). One of his characters has just published a book; it's not a very good book, but the character is high enough up in society to be able to have the book published and get book reviewers to review it. Trollope takes the opportunity to kick a little dirt in the direction of the "book reviewing profession. He starts by categorizing book reviews:

There is the review intended to sell a book - which comes out immediately after the appearance of the book, or sometimes before it; the review which gives reputation, but does not affect the sale, and which comes a little later; the review which snuffs a book out quietly; the review which is to raise or lower the author a single peg, or two pegs, as the case may be; the review which is to suddenly make an author, and the review which is to crush him. An exuberant [reviewer] has been known before now to declare aloud that he would crush a man, and a self-confident [reviewer] has been known to declare that he has accomplished the deed. Of all reviews, the crushing review is the most popular, as being the most readable. When the rumor goes abroad that some notable man has been actually crushed - been positively driven over by an entire Juggernaut's car of criticism till his literary body be a mere amorphous mass - then a real success has been achieved...

The composition of the review, together with the reading of the book, consumed altogether perhaps an hour of Mr. Booker's time. He made no attempt to cut the pages, but here and there read those that were open. He had done this kind of thing so often that he knew well what he was about. He could have reviewed such a book when he was three parts asleep. When the work was done, he threw down his pen and uttered a deep sigh. He felt it to be hard upon him that he should be so compelled, by the exigencies of his position, to descend so low in literature; but it did not occur to him to reflect that in fact he was not so compelled, and that he was quite at liberty to break stones, or to starve, honestly, of no other honest mode of carrying on his career was open to him. "If I didn't do it, somebody else would," he said to himself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top