Is frequent the theatre Sin?

[Mike McK]

Originally posted by Dr. Bob:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (touch not; taste not; handle not; which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men? Which things have indeed a show of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.

Show of wisdom
Neglect the body

Relaxation, entertainment, humour, is all a blessing and a necessity to MY spirit. I have a CD playing (Bach) that is soothing my spirit this hour.

Let's put away the self-flagellation and climb down out of our caves and realize that a NEED of the flesh is not a LUST of the flesh. </font>[/QUOTE]You're right, Bob.

It's important for us to realize that even Jesus took time off from the crowds to relax.

 

[Mike McK]

Originally posted by av1611jim:
Show me your faith without works and I will show you mine BY my works. Seems I read that somewhere?

But I believe that my faith produces good works in me, not that I please God by my good works.

Therefore, my actions ARE to be holy and sanctified.

But Jesus has already made me holy and sanctified.

"Therefore come out from among them and be ye seperate." "Touch not the unclean thing" "Forsake not the assembling of yourselves...'etc, etc, etc.

Yes...and?

One is not insecure in their faith if they see these admonitions in Scripture and take them SERIOUSLY as they are intended.

But I believe that they are insecure in their faith if they insist on holding others to an imagined standard that the Bible does not teach.

What was it that Jesus said to the Pharisees about putting so many man made rules on their followers as to become burdensome?

I am certainly NOT against liberty.

So then, why do you condemn those of us who choose to exercise it?

It is a baptist distinctive and is a Scriptural privilege of the saints. However;
Ga 5:13
¶ For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.
AND;
Jas 1:25
But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.
AND;
1Pe 2:15
For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:
1Pe 2:16
As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.

Except that no one here is talking about abusing their liberty as an excuse to sin.

Just my take on things and I think the Scripture supports my position.

If not scripture, certainly your ego supports your position.

Certainly it is the Holy Spirit who sanctifies us and our actions. That is a no brainer. But to say our actions are NOT a display of holiness and are NOT to be sanctified is utterly false.

Actually, I've never said this.

I submit, they who cry for liberty to justify their unbiblical philosophy of "anything goes" are NOT wise.

Who here has said this?

Do what you will. As for me and my house we will serve the Lord.

As will I but I will not put anyone in bondage to a law that Christ never taught to do it.

 

[4His_glory]

Excelletn post Mike Mck.

 

[superdave]

I don't hear anyone saying "anything goes"

I think the predominant response that you are maligning is more along the lines of "as long as the content is not sinful, the venue is irrelevant"

Its a focus on what would be the response to a particular sitution by a Godly person, not what is the Godly behavior. Two mighty different perspectives on how we judge our own behaviour, and how we view the actions of others.

We (at least I) who are not condemning the theatre, are not saying "anything goes" Paul makes it pretty clear that our liberty and God's grace are not to be used as justification for Sin. God Forbid, (I apologize to those who view this as using the Lord's name in vain)

 

[Mike McK]

Originally posted by superdave:
I don't hear anyone saying "anything goes"

I think the predominant response that you are maligning is more along the lines of "as long as the content is not sinful, the venue is irrelevant"

Its a focus on what would be the response to a particular sitution by a Godly person, not what is the Godly behavior. Two mighty different perspectives on how we judge our own behaviour, and how we view the actions of others.

We (at least I) who are not condemning the theatre, are not saying "anything goes" Paul makes it pretty clear that our liberty and God's grace are not to be used as justification for Sin. God Forbid, (I apologize to those who view this as using the Lord's name in vain)

I agree.

To paraphrase Paul, we know that where sin abounds, God's grace abounds even more but does that mean that we keep on sinning just because we know that God's grace is going to pick up the tab? Heaven forbid!

It's simplistic and unfair to say that, just because we have a different opnion, we have no standards.

Just so Jim knows, I have walked out of movies because of their content.

 

[James_Newman]

So how much wickedness should a movie contain before we walk out? Where is the line?

 

[Mike McK]

Anytime something encourages you to sin or to violate your conscience, then you should leave.

 

[Ben W]

Originally posted by James_Newman:
So how much wickedness should a movie contain before we walk out? Where is the line?

Maybe the same could apply with the conversation at work around the lunch room table?

 

[James_Newman]

Originally posted by Ben W:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by James_Newman:
So how much wickedness should a movie contain before we walk out? Where is the line?

Maybe the same could apply with the conversation at work around the lunch room table? </font>[/QUOTE]Absolutely

 

[Aaron]

Originally posted by 7-Kids:
how does one seek the Kingdom of God and His righteousness in bed with their spouse.

how does one seek the Kingdom of God and His righteousness at whataburgers feedin his face.

how does one seek the Kingdom of God and His righteousness etc....etc....etc...

Now you're asking the right questions. Instead of asking what is wrong about something, the renewed mind asks, "What is right?" Ask that question before you do anything, and these "questionable" matters will be instantly cleared up.

In fact, most people will discover they have a lot of free time they could devote to service.

 

[Aaron]

Originally posted by Dr. Bob:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (touch not; taste not; handle not; which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men? Which things have indeed a show of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.

Show of wisdom
Neglect the body

Relaxation, entertainment, humour, is all a blessing and a necessity to MY spirit. I have a CD playing (Bach) that is soothing my spirit this hour.

Let's put away the self-flagellation and climb down out of our caves and realize that a NEED of the flesh is not a LUST of the flesh. </font>[/QUOTE]The delight of the "blessed" is in the law of the Lord. Ps. 1

Concerning rest: Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.

Through the way where hope is guiding,
hark, what peaceful music rings;
where the flock, in thee confiding,
drink of joy from deathless springs.
Theirs is beauty's fairest pleasure;
theirs is wisdom's holiest treasure.
Thou dost ever lead thine own
in the love of joys unknown.

Jesu, Joy of Man's Desiring

 

[Aaron]

Originally posted by superdave:
OK, I'll take the bait.

The Biblical principles regarding entertainment really fall into two basic categories. On the negative side you have the admonition to "set no wicked thing before my eyes" that is pretty basic, and applies to the Theatre, VCR/DVD players, Cable, the Internet, Books, Magazines, Whatever visual medium you want to choose.

On the positive side you have the admonition most clearly voiced by Paul when he spoke of the way that we deal with our thought life in general. Phi 4:8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.

So as I have said before, IF you watch content that is not wicked in nature, and IF the movies you do select have positive themes that encourage your thought life and do not turn you away from truth, than I don't see how anyone has a leg to stand on Biblically in denying the validity of those forms of entertainment, no matter what the delivering medium.

The best answer, so far. You realize that your principles have disqualified just about every flick in the theatres, don't you? So, is frequenting the theatre sin? (I'm sure John3v36 had Hollywood in mind, not celluloid, projectors, screens and seats.)

 

[superdave]

Just so Jim knows, I have walked out of movies because of their content.

Me too, I have also returned dvds for the same reason. Those who say they have less control in the theatre, are just making excuses for sin.

The best answer, so far. You realize that your principles have disqualified just about every flick in the theatres, don't you? So, is frequenting the theatre sin? (I'm sure John3v36 had Hollywood in mind, not celluloid, projectors, screens and seats.)

There is not much, I would agree with that absolutely. I can find much better use of my time than to watch Mel's Passion. No, frequenting the theatre is not sin. It has nothing to do with where or how often. ITs about the content and the thematic elements. That being said, what is frequent. I think I saw like 3 movies last year? I actually prefer to watch them at home where I have a TV guardian to remove any objectionable language.

 

[IfbReformer]

Going to a movie theater is no more a sin than renting a video from the video store.

Going to a movie theater is no more a sin than buying a magazine or a book is.

It all depends on what you are watching or what book or magazine you are buying.

Forbiding going to theaters was just another example of the legalistic pharasitical system that has entered fundamentalism over the years.

Its one thing if you choose not to go personally, its another if you legislate your personal standard for all other believers - thats legalism.

IFBReformer

 

[IfbReformer]

Originally posted by James_Newman:
So how much wickedness should a movie contain before we walk out? Where is the line?

What about if it has a 'hint' of sin?
Ephesians 5:3(NIV)
"But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people."

What is a 'hint' of evil? I think that would be like a drop. That's not much. But is this verse saying that if anything we are watching, reading buying or participating in has a hint of evil in that we are not to be involved with it? Or is it saying that there is not to be "among you" or among us even a hint of evil? Or are these the same thing?

What Paul is saying here is that we are to search ourselves,and that there should we should not find one 'hint' of these things in ourselves. If we do we should ask God for forgiveness and strive to remove these things (through his power) from our lives. It is not saying that if I pick the Detroit News and there is an ad in there that is evil that I must throw out the Detroit News Paper.

I want to clarify something here. I am not saying we can watch anything as long as we do not exhibit those qualities. For surely what a man fills his mind with that is what he will eventually become. But if I am reading something or watching something and there happens to be a scene or some (and some is a relative term here) language I disagree with that does not make that item unredeemable. But we must be careful, and there is no exact science in this area. This is where Biblical discernment must take place and we will all draw lines a little differently.

Now the above paragraph is where a lot of IFBs will attack me. They will say I believe in "situational ethics" and "personal preferences". These labels some legalistic IFBs like to through out. Let me first say that I am guilty as charged here. I do believe in "situational ethics" and "personal preferences". But is all in how you define those labels.

First lets tackle the label of "situational ethics". This basically means that the same activity in one situation is fine, while in another situation it is not. Is this not the case in real life? If I shoot a man and kill him, that same action in one "situation" would be murder and in another "situation" it could be self-defense.

But there are other things, that no matter what the situation they are wrong. An example of this would be stealing. Whether I am stealing to feed my starving self or I am stealing to make a profit, it is still wrong, no matter what the situation.

What about this label "personal preferences". Does the Bible leave room for personal preferences on anything? I don't think anyone could come away from Romans chapter 14 and think otherwise. Paul says "5One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind."(Rom 14:5). So apparently Paul acknowledged that there would be different standards among believers on some disputable issues.

Romans 14 is all but ignored by most legalists today. Most attempt either to explain it way with saying the one who ate meat is symbolic of the Christian who understands that he needs to be stricter in his life. The one who ate only vegetables did not understand that and had less rules. But this is clearly not what the passage was saying. It clearly is saying that the one who understands he can eat meat that once he could not, is the stronger Christian. The one who eats only vegetables does not believe he has the freedom to do so.

I have recently heard one legalist say Romans 14 only applied to the dietary laws and Jewish Holy days not being required anymore. There can be no broader application than that. Its incredible what they will come up with to dismiss this critically important passage of scripture.

In this area of disputable matters I offer these passages to ponder on:

Romans 14:23(NIV)
"But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin."

If you are reading something or watching something or listening to a program and you are not doing it in faith that is right, or you have doubts about it then do not do it. But do not take you doubts and make those law for all Christians, this is where legalism comes into play.

http://www.ifbreformation.org/Separation.aspx

IFBReformer

 

[superdave]

I faded fast reading that post, and Obviously I would have to get about 6 hours worth of clarification to determine exactly what you meant by a few of the points, but I do agree, that Romans 14 is all but ignored in many cases. Good men and women will disagree on many of these issues, but Romans makes it clear, when there is a minor disagreement on a particular issue relating to specific cultural applications of Biblical principles, that it is not to be judged either way. And as you pointed out, be fully convinced in your own mind, don't violate your conscience. IT may be operating on flawed principles, but getting it used to being flaunted is not a place you want to be.

And if you are addressing those in your sphere of influence that do have issues with things that can at times seem downright ridiculous, you have to address the principles they are basing their positions on, and teach them to evaluate things Biblically, rather than simply telling them, "there's nothing wrong with that, get over it" You want to reshape their thinking on the issue, rather than asking them to ignore their conscience and their own interpretation.

 

[superdave]

On the Baptist Board OTOH...

There's nothing wrong with that, get over it.

 

[robycop3]

In Jesus' time, they had theatres for entertainment, as well as the Rome 500 chariot race of Ben-Hur fame, and various gladitorial events There was also quite a bit of racing, of horses and men and camels, for various distances. Also, there were many board games.

What made that ancient entertainment sometimes unsavory was gambling. (The loss of human life in gladiatorial contests speaks for itself.)

There is a little mention of sport in Scripture...the swordplay between Joab's & Abner's men, which led to a battle, the races mentioned by Paul. We see NO condemnation of sports & entertainment in Scripture...and we see NO mention of that most sommon form of entertainment of that day, the live theatre. I have read in various reference books that ribald plays are NOT a modern invention.

Again...It's a matter of conscience. If you choose not to watch movies, fine...but don't condemn those who do. I DO watch movies, but I respect YOUR right and choice NOT to watch.

 

[James_Newman]

Then you should also respect our right to say they have no redeeming value and they are a waste of a Christian's valuable time, which time we have been admonished to redeem.

Ephesians 5:11-16
[11] And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
[12] For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret.
[13] But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light.
[14] Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.
[15] See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise,
[16] Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.

If it is a shame to speak of the unfruitful works of darkness, how much more shameful is it to get pleasure from watching them?

 

[superdave]

If it is a shame to speak of the unfruitful works of darkness, how much more shameful is it to get pleasure from watching them?

I don't recall reading in his post that he was going to be watching the unfrutiful works of darkness. Could just be me.

Also, Romans 14 clearly says that in issues of the conscience, you have no Biblical right to say that, besides the fact that is poor exegesis and a misrepresentation of the text. Many Godly folks disagree on this issue, and way too many people address it just like you have, with scriptures that apply to content, not to the actual issue we are discussing here.