# The Christian And The Theater



## Blueridge Believer (Aug 14, 2007)

This was written in the 1820's. I wonder what they would think of the stuff we watch on T.V. today and rent on DVD. Wow!

THE CHRISTIAN AND THE THEATER

Look at what they wrote about actors in the 1820's:




Accordingly, in all ages and countries, play-actors have been generally found triflers, buffoons, sensualists, unfit for sober employment, and loose in their morals. It is not pretended that there have been no exceptions to this character. But the exceptions have been so few, and their circumstances so extraordinary, as to confirm, rather than invalidate the general argument. And is it even true, that there ever has been a complete exception? Was there ever an actor who exhibited a life of steady, exemplary, Christian purity and piety? I never heard of such a person; and until I do, I shall venture to say there never was one. Yet this is the profession which all who frequent the theater contribute their share, to encourage and support. They give their presence, their influence, and their money—for the maintenance of a class of people whose business it is—directly or indirectly, to instill error and sin, to corrupt our children, and to counteract whatever the friends of piety and good morals are striving to accomplish for the benefit of society.


----------



## BobVigneault (Aug 14, 2007)

The writer would think that nothing has changed, as far as character goes, but he would be shocked that our culture as a whole CELEBRATES the very things that his day had the sense enough to hide behind closed doors.

Why do you suppose the entertainment industry is the vehicle of vice?


----------



## AV1611 (Aug 14, 2007)

Recently I have been provoked greatly by some articles I read about the sinfulness of drama. Since then I, by His grace, have resisted their lure.

http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_19.html
http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_92.htm

also this.


----------



## Ravens (Aug 14, 2007)

David Murray's sermon on movies and the Christian:

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=8507171319


----------



## AV1611 (Aug 14, 2007)

Looks good brother...will download it.

*Psalm 101:3* "I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes: I hate the work of them that turn aside; it shall not cleave to me."
*Psalm 101:7* "He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight."


----------



## Blueridge Believer (Aug 14, 2007)

Thanks for these links brethren.


----------



## kvanlaan (Aug 15, 2007)

Sort of in the same vein - it deals more with entertainment coming into the church. When you read it, it almost seems like a modern article, but Brown was a contemporary of Spurgeon's.

http://www.tbaptist.com/aab/devilsmissionamusement.htm


----------



## AV1611 (Aug 15, 2007)

JDWiseman said:


> David Murray's sermon on movies and the Christian:
> 
> http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=8507171319



Well I listened to it last night. I would highly recommend it!


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Aug 15, 2007)

Here's another old piece, from 1812, 
The Nature and Effects of the Stage, by Samuel Miller, D.D.


----------



## AV1611 (Aug 15, 2007)

Here's Tertullian's _The Shows, or De Spectaculis_


----------



## Blueridge Believer (Aug 15, 2007)

AV1611 said:


> JDWiseman said:
> 
> 
> > David Murray's sermon on movies and the Christian:
> ...




I listened to it as well. Very convicting.


----------



## Reformed Baptist (Aug 15, 2007)

Blueridge Baptist said:


> This was written in the 1820's. I wonder what they would think of the stuff we watch on T.V. today and rent on DVD. Wow!
> 
> THE CHRISTIAN AND THE THEATER
> 
> ...



Ouch, that smarts on the conscience...


----------



## AV1611 (Aug 15, 2007)

Blueridge Baptist said:


> I listened to it as well. Very convicting.



If you liked it brother then read this series. This is the series of articles that pricked my conscience on the issue:

http://www.rfpa.org/sb/PrintStandardBearerArticle.asp?article4=2671
http://www.rfpa.org/sb/PrintStandardBearerArticle.asp?article4=2643
http://www.rfpa.org/sb/PrintStandardBearerArticle.asp?article4=2632
http://www.rfpa.org/sb/PrintStandardBearerArticle.asp?article4=2599
http://www.rfpa.org/sb/PrintStandardBearerArticle.asp?article4=2586
http://www.rfpa.org/sb/PrintStandardBearerArticle.asp?article4=2503


----------



## Blueridge Believer (Aug 15, 2007)

AV1611 said:


> Blueridge Baptist said:
> 
> 
> > I listened to it as well. Very convicting.
> ...




I've read the first two so far. I greatly appreciate the link dear brother.


----------



## kvanlaan (Aug 15, 2007)

Richard, the PRCA pamphlet #19 contained many items of interest but I found this one particularly revealing. It would seem that in 1966, Synod changed its mind about theatre attendance because _people weren't obeying their injunctions anyway_. That's quite a strategy for a biblically-directed body to employ! :shooting self in foot smilie here:



> The basic position of the committee was that the film arts were not per-se wrong and that it is permissible for the Christian to attend good movies. In fact, the committee considered it desirable to attend good movies and urged upon the Churches to busy themselves in subjecting the film arts to the dominion and rule of Jesus Christ.



Oh my. We all see how well that turned out.

Still working on the rest of it. Though quite voluminous, I am looking forward to it. Cheers.


----------



## Blueridge Believer (Aug 15, 2007)

I read all six brother Richard. I really aprreciated them. Much conviction was wrought by thier reading.


----------



## Augusta (Aug 15, 2007)

AV1611 said:


> JDWiseman said:
> 
> 
> > David Murray's sermon on movies and the Christian:
> ...




I also recommend it. Just listened to it and it's really good. He answers all of the objections that come up. I especially liked that he quotes the WLC on sins forbidden in the 7th commandment. Not one pays attention to these anymore:

_The sins forbidden in the seventh commandment, besides the neglect of the duties required, are, adultery, fornication, rape, incest, sodomy, and all unnatural lusts; all unclean imaginations, thoughts, purposes, and affections;*all corrupt or filthy communications, or listening thereunto*; wanton looks, impudent or light behavior, immodest apparel; prohibiting of lawful, and dispensing with unlawful marriages; allowing, tolerating, keeping of stews, and resorting to them; entangling vows of single life, undue delay of marriage; having more wives or husbands than one at the same time; unjust divorce, or desertion; idleness, gluttony, drunkenness, *unchaste company; lascivious songs, books, pictures, dancings, stage plays; and all other provocations to, or acts of uncleanness, either in ourselves or others*. _


----------



## KMK (Aug 15, 2007)

Blueridge Baptist said:


> This was written in the 1820's. I wonder what they would think of the stuff we watch on T.V. today and rent on DVD. Wow!
> 
> THE CHRISTIAN AND THE THEATER
> 
> ...



Wouldn't the same be just as true with the changes in bold? Are we to hide in fear from all of the arts?

Just so you know, my entire family is auditioning tonight for a community theater production of "Oliver!" Your prayers would be appreciated. My 12 year old would like to play the part of 'the Artful Dodger.' I don't know what they will do with me seeing that there are not many adult roles. There are two other families from my church that are auditioning as well.


----------



## AV1611 (Aug 16, 2007)

KMK said:


> Blueridge Baptist said:
> 
> 
> > This was written in the 1820's. I wonder what they would think of the stuff we watch on T.V. today and rent on DVD. Wow!
> ...




I trust that these will answer your question:

http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_19.html
http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_92.htm


----------



## Blueridge Believer (Aug 16, 2007)

KMK said:


> Blueridge Baptist said:
> 
> 
> > This was written in the 1820's. I wonder what they would think of the stuff we watch on T.V. today and rent on DVD. Wow!
> ...





Oh no dear brother. I just posted it because I have a great concern about the influence that TV and movies have had on the church and family. I never intended it to be legalistic or to make blanket judgements. However, this entire study has brought about great conviction on me to be more wary about what goes in my eyes and ears in the future.


----------



## KMK (Aug 16, 2007)

Blueridge Baptist said:


> KMK said:
> 
> 
> > Blueridge Baptist said:
> ...



I knew your intentions, Mr. Farley, and I agree with them. I know there is one member of PB, (No Longer A Libertine) who works in Hollywood and I am sure he has some horror stories as I do about the field of professional musicians. I think there is a real danger to any of the arts for falling into pride, especially if you are talented. (That is why it has never been a danger for me.) Many begin to actually believe what everyone tells them.

Come to think of it, this happens with athletes, politicians and even preachers!


----------



## ZackF (Aug 21, 2007)

*TV/Movies and such...*

Interesting thread. I don't have the citations in front of me but I think many in the church reacted the same way to the rise of the novel. It would be a helpful study. Doesn't the quote go that a "...novel is a well told lie." Sufficed to say, all kinds of professions suffer a blanket condemnation today whether they deserve it or not. Police officers, lawyers, statesmen, doctors and business people and so forth no doubt all feel persecuted.


----------



## KMK (Aug 29, 2007)

Just to let you know, my oldest boy was cast as Oliver Twist, I was cast as Mr. Bumble, and my two youngest boys were cast as orphans. My wife and daughter plan on helping with the sets. The performances are in Nov. Four in Victorville, and four in Phelan. Get your plane reservations now.

I have always had a secret desire for thespianism.


----------



## Covenant Joel (Aug 29, 2007)

AV1611 said:


> Recently I have been provoked greatly by some articles I read about the sinfulness of drama. Since then I, by His grace, have resisted their lure.
> 
> http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_19.html
> http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_92.htm
> ...



I read through the majority of the 1st one. While I agree that Christians need to be careful about addiction to entertainment, etc., I would challenge several key assumptions made in that article.

1) It said that you cannot know whether a movie is good or bad before you go to see it. That is simply no longer true with sites such as screenit.com and pluggedinonline.com. PluggedInOnline warns you of any objectionable content, including unBiblical worldviews. I never go to a movie without first checking these.

2) I'm simply not persuaded by the "drama is sin" argument. It seems to me that some huge leaps are made..."we are uniquely created in God's image, so to take on someone else's personality is sinful." I can't find that in Scripture. If that is something that someone is convicted on, I understand and am not going to pressure them to participate/watch drama, but I simply fail to grasp that argumentation. But in order to be fair, I will take the time to read the second one and see what else is to be said.


----------



## KMK (Aug 29, 2007)

Theater in its purest sense is simply story telling in 3-D. It starts in the backyard when we say, "OK, we'll be the cowboys in the wagon train and you be the indians that are trying to rob us."

I think Mr. Farley and other concerns are over the fact that it seems to inevitably take on 'baggage' that can be damaging. I agree but take it one step further to point out that all of the arts have this tendency.

A whole new thread could be started to discuss 'WHY?'


----------



## AV1611 (Aug 29, 2007)

Covenant Joel said:


> 1) It said that you cannot know whether a movie is good or bad before you go to see it. That is simply no longer true with sites such as screenit.com and pluggedinonline.com. PluggedInOnline warns you of any objectionable content, including unBiblical worldviews. I never go to a movie without first checking these.



The key issue is not so much what the content is but the fact that drama is in and of itself sinful. I shall however deal with that later.

A second issue is whether we should frequent the cinema or theatre owing to our giving tacit consent to what goes on. "Oh, Covenant Joel went to see X-men at the multiplex and he is a Christian. It will be ok for us to go and see the Simpson's movie." It sets a bad example. "Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful." (Psalm 1:1)

Regarding content. Do those films, shows or whatever make light of marriage? Do they wink at adultery and fornication? Do they champion revenge and vengefulness? Do they teach us to glory in our nation as opposed to Christ? Do they teach that disobeying parents is funny? And I could go on.

"I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes: I hate the work of them that turn aside; it shall not cleave to me." (Psalm 101:3)



Covenant Joel said:


> 2) I'm simply not persuaded by the "drama is sin" argument. It seems to me that some huge leaps are made..."we are uniquely created in God's image, so to take on someone else's personality is sinful."



I would argue that look at one of the biggest blue collar crimes - fraud. The world knows that to impersonate someone is wrong. It is a lie and so breaks the 9th commandment "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." I am pretending to be someone else. I am impersonating someone else.

"He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight." (Psalm 101:7)

Try this also.


----------



## Blueridge Believer (Aug 29, 2007)

My point is starting this thread was to try and get us to re-examine our entertainment habits. We let so much filth into our home via the T.V. set and video's that we have become desensitized to sin and unbiblical worldviews. The whole study has led me to be ever more vigilant in stopping unchristian entertainment and views outside the door of my house and before they make it in. I may have to put up with it in the work place but it does not need to be in my home.


----------



## Ravens (Aug 29, 2007)

I found this to be rather powerful, from Tertullian's _De Spectaculis_, which AV linked to above.



> *Chapter 29
> *
> Even as things are, if your thought is to spend this period of existence in enjoyments, how are you so ungrateful as to reckon insufficient, as not thankfully to recognize the many and exquisite pleasures God has bestowed upon you? For what more delightful than to have God the Father and our Lord at peace with us, than revelation of the truth, than confession of our errors, than pardon of the innumerable sins of our past life? What greater pleasure than distaste of pleasure itself, contempt of all that the world can give, true liberty, a pure conscience, a contented life, and freedom from all fear of death? What nobler than to tread under foot the gods of the nations—to exorcise evil spirits—to perform cures—to seek divine revealings—to live to God? These are the pleasures, these the spectacles that befit Christian men—holy, everlasting, free. Count of these as your circus games, fix your eyes on the courses of the world, the gliding seasons, reckon up the periods of time, long for the goal of the final consummation, defend the societies of the churches, be startled at God's signal, be roused up at the angel's trump, glory in the palms of martyrdom. If the literature of the stage delight you, we have literature in abundance of our own—plenty of verses, sentences, songs, proverbs; and these not fabulous, but true; not tricks of art, but plain realities. Would you have also fightings and wrestlings? Well, of these there is no lacking, and they are not of slight account. Behold unchastity overcome by chastity, perfidy slain by faithfulness, cruelty stricken by compassion, impudence thrown into the shade by modesty: these are the contests we have among us, and in these we win our crowns. Would you have something of blood too? You have Christ's.


----------



## Covenant Joel (Aug 29, 2007)

AV1611 said:


> The key issue is not so much what the content is but the fact that drama is in and of itself sinful. I shall however deal with that later.



I was merely responding to an assertion made in the article. 



> A second issue is whether we should frequent the cinema or theatre owing to our giving tacit consent to what goes on. "Oh, Covenant Joel went to see X-men at the multiplex and he is a Christian. It will be ok for us to go and see the Simpson's movie." It sets a bad example. "Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful." (Psalm 1:1)



I do not see how your argument follows. "He saw X so I can see Y." That doesn't logically follow. I am consenting to only what I personally view, not what everyone else is viewing. Personally, I am not a frequent movie goer, because I do not find much that there that I wish to watch. But when there is something there that I consider worth seeing, I go.



> Regarding content. Do those films, shows or whatever make light of marriage? Do they wink at adultery and fornication? Do they champion revenge and vengefulness? Do they teach us to glory in our nation as opposed to Christ? Do they teach that disobeying parents is funny? And I could go on.
> 
> "I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes: I hate the work of them that turn aside; it shall not cleave to me." (Psalm 101:3)



What you are arguing for there is, if I am not mistaken, discernment, which I would stringently advocate with regards to movies. But I do not think that an unbiblical worldview necessarily makes a movie forbidden to the Christian--we should be discerning enough and rooted enough in Scripture to identify those for what they are, and reject the ideas, while still enjoying a form of entertainment which is nonetheless well done and therefore indicative of God's common grace.

But again, I am an advocate of being very careful in what we watch. A steady diet of those things without biblical reflection on them would be quite problematic. 



> I would argue that look at one of the biggest blue collar crimes - fraud. The world knows that to impersonate someone is wrong. It is a lie and so breaks the 9th commandment "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." I am pretending to be someone else. I am impersonating someone else.



Again, I simply do not see that logical connection. What the world knows isn't necessarily the issue (not denying natural law or conscience). Fraud is not a crime because it impersonates someone, it is because it steals their identity to use it for unlawful ends. That is entirely different than pretending to be Julius Caesar in a production of Shakespeare's play. 

In what way is someone involved in bearing false witness against his neighbor by pretending to be Julius Caesar? No one thinks he is genuinely Caesar. No one thinks he is trying to steal Ceasar's identity. He is merely reenacting what a historical novel might do--putting flesh on the words. I would object that it is a lie. It would be a lie if I said in all seriousness, "I am Henry V." But if I am playing Henry V in a drama, I am not seriously saying that I am he. I am fleshing out a story.



> "He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight." (Psalm 101:7)



No one denies that lying should be avoided. I just do not see the connection between lying and drama.



> Try this also.



Thanks for the link, I will check it out.


----------



## AV1611 (Aug 30, 2007)

Covenant Joel said:


> I do not see how your argument follows. "He saw X so I can see Y." That doesn't logically follow. I am consenting to only what I personally view, not what everyone else is viewing. Personally, I am not a frequent movie goer, because I do not find much that there that I wish to watch. But when there is something there that I consider worth seeing, I go.



Indeed but that is not what your normal self-justifying natural man thinks. This however is simply a tertiary concern for the more pressing issue is whether we should be watching drama in the first place.



Covenant Joel said:


> I do not think that an unbiblical worldview necessarily makes a movie forbidden to the Christian--we should be discerning enough and rooted enough in Scripture to identify those for what they are, and reject the ideas, while still enjoying a form of entertainment which is nonetheless well done and therefore indicative of God's common grace.



A drama founded upon an unbiblical world-view is not going to promote good. Can a lepard change his spots, can good fruit come from a bad tree etc etc.

The doctrine of common grace is a lie propagated by Abraham Kuyper. It has no foundation, absolutely none, upon the word of God. The ploughing of the wicked is sin. Every act that the wicked man does is sinful. He is unable to do good and God's wrath rests upon the fruit of their labour.



Covenant Joel said:


> But again, I am an advocate of being very careful in what we watch.







Covenant Joel said:


> Again, I simply do not see that logical connection. What the world knows isn't necessarily the issue (not denying natural law or conscience). Fraud is not a crime because it impersonates someone, it is because it steals their identity to use it for unlawful ends. That is entirely different than pretending to be Julius Caesar in a production of Shakespeare's play.



On first glance, yes but what of the prinicple. The principle is that you would be pretenting to be someone you are not. That is a lie and is under the wrath of God.



Covenant Joel said:


> In what way is someone involved in bearing false witness against his neighbor by pretending to be Julius Caesar?



From the _Westminster Larger Catechism_:

*Question 143: Which is the ninth commandment?
Answer: *The ninth commandment is, Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

*Question 144: What are the duties required in the ninth commandment?
Answer:* The duties required in the ninth commandment are, the preserving and promoting of truth between man and man, and the good name of our neighbor, as well as our own; appearing and standing for the truth; and from the heart, sincerely, freely, clearly, and fully, speaking the truth, and only the truth, in matters of judgment and justice, and in all other things: Whatsoever; a charitable esteem of our neighbors; loving, desiring, and rejoicing in their good name; sorrowing for, and covering of their infirmities; freely acknowledging of their gifts and graces, defending their innocency; a ready receiving of a good report, and unwillingness to admit of an evil report, concerning them; discouraging talebearers, flatterers, and slanderers; love and care of our own good name, and defending it when need requires; keeping of lawful promises; studying and practicing of: Whatsoever things are true, honest, lovely, and of good report.

*Question 145: What are the sins forbidden in the ninth commandment?
Answer: *The sins forbidden in the ninth commandment are, all prejudicing the truth, and the good name of our neighbors, as well as our own, especially in public judicature; giving false evidence, suborning false witnesses, wittingly appearing and pleading for an evil cause, outfacing and overbearing the truth; passing unjust sentence, calling evil good, and good evil; rewarding the wicked according to the work of the righteous, and the righteous according to the work of the wicked; forgery, concealing the truth, undue silence in a just cause, and holding our peace when iniquity calls for either a reproof from ourselves, or complaint to others; speaking the truth unseasonably, or maliciously to a wrong end, or perverting it to a wrong meaning, or in doubtful and equivocal expressions, to the prejudice of truth or justice; speaking untruth, lying, slandering, backbiting, detracting, tale bearing, whispering, scoffing, reviling, rash, harsh, and partial censuring; misconstructing intentions, words, and actions; flattering, vainglorious boasting, thinking or speaking too highly or too meanly of ourselves or others; denying the gifts and graces of God; aggravating smaller faults; hiding, excusing, or extenuating of sins, when called to a free confession; unnecessary discovering of infirmities; raising false rumors, receiving and countenancing evil reports, and stopping our ears against just defense; evil suspicion; envying or grieving at the deserved credit of any, endeavoring or desiring to impair it, rejoicing in their disgrace and infamy; scornful contempt, fond admiration; breach of lawful promises; neglecting such things as are of good report, and practicing, or not avoiding ourselves, or not hindering: What we can in others, such things as procure an ill name.​
You are lying to them. 



Covenant Joel said:


> No one thinks he is genuinely Caesar. No one thinks he is trying to steal Ceasar's identity. He is merely reenacting what a historical novel might do--putting flesh on the words. I would object that it is a lie. It would be a lie if I said in all seriousness, "I am Henry V." But if I am playing Henry V in a drama, I am not seriously saying that I am he. I am fleshing out a story.



"Drama is, by definition, the presentation of the life of another person, whether real or fictitious, by the assumption of that person's personality for purposes of entertainment. The key point here is that drama is possible only by assuming another's personality. Any textbook on drama will emphasize this. The "gifted" actor is the person who is able to suppress completely his own personality and assume the personality of another. The more he is able to do this, the better actor he is. He must, to be successful, assume to himself all the thoughts, all the desires, all the emotions, all the feelings of the person whose role he plays. He must, as much as he can, make himself that person. He must make himself feel as that person feels, think as that person thinks. He must, so to speak, crawl behind the skin of that man and get into his bones and marrow to lay hold of that person in the very depths of his being. He must put himself deeply inside that person so that he looks through the person's eyes, down that person's nose, and experiences all that that person feels and thinks....In the second place, the sin of this can be demonstrated by means of another consideration. All will have to agree that in assuming another personality there are only two possibilities. The one possibility is that of assuming the personality of a sinner. But if an actor assumes the personality of a sinner, he must, in the nature of the case, assume all that person's sin. He must think his evil thoughts, experience his evil emotions, will his evil desires, speak his evil words, and do his evil deeds. He must assume all those sins and make them his own in a very deep and intense way."

Moreover, should the acts of these historical figures be played out? Who wants to see the incest of Nero pretend or otherwise? Who wants to see marriage scorned? To laugh at such things is to sin.



Covenant Joel said:


> No one denies that lying should be avoided. I just do not see the connection between lying and drama.



I trust you will in time 

I would simply urge you, when you next feel the need for a fix of movie, to stop and do something wholesome with that time, sanctify your time brother. Blessings shall abound for sure.

http://sb.rfpa.org/printissue.cfm?issue=467


----------



## AV1611 (Aug 30, 2007)

JDWiseman said:


> I found this to be rather powerful, from Tertullian's _De Spectaculis_, which AV linked to above.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## kvanlaan (Aug 30, 2007)

> My point is starting this thread was to try and get us to re-examine our entertainment habits. We let so much filth into our home via the T.V. set and video's that we have become desensitized to sin and unbiblical worldviews. The whole study has led me to be ever more vigilant in stopping unchristian entertainment and views outside the door of my house and before they make it in. I may have to put up with it in the work place but it does not need to be in my home.



Some say that there are good shows on the tube and I don't know that I can totally disagree. BUT even the best of them has wee bites of Satan scattered between them in the form of commercials. I know I posted this somewhere before but on our recent trip to Hawaii we saw our first commericals in more than a few years and had to keep my daughter's eyes turned away - it was simply filth. And that was on the Discovery Channel! 

I don't know that I'd walk a 500-acre minefield on the chance that I may smell one rose planted in the center thereof, it's just not worth it.

Our video collection is shrinking - there is no film that we've found of late that does _not_ take the Lord's name in vain at least a few times. And every time I hear it, it comes to me that I am paying people with my own hand to blaspheme the name of the Lord. Sick.


----------



## Covenant Joel (Aug 30, 2007)

AV1611 said:


> Indeed but that is not what your normal self-justifying natural man thinks. This however is simply a tertiary concern for the more pressing issue is whether we should be watching drama in the first place.



Agree to disagre...it's good to focus on the bigger issue probably anyway.



Covenant Joel said:


> I do not think that an unbiblical worldview necessarily makes a movie forbidden to the Christian--we should be discerning enough and rooted enough in Scripture to identify those for what they are, and reject the ideas, while still enjoying a form of entertainment which is nonetheless well done and therefore indicative of God's common grace.



A drama founded upon an unbiblical world-view is not going to promote good. Can a lepard change his spots, can good fruit come from a bad tree etc etc.[/quote]

Granted, an unbiblical worldview is not in and of itself going to promote good. Thus we watch discerningly, identifying that worldview for what is, and rejecting it, so that we are in the world, but not of it. Should I read a book such as "The God Delusion" in order to understand a non-Christian's arguments? If so, that is the same thing, and we read discerningly with Biblical lenses. If not, then you would appear to be arguing for more than just abstention from drama, but also any contact with ideas contrary to Scripture.



> The doctrine of common grace is a lie propagated by Abraham Kuyper. It has no foundation, absolutely none, upon the word of God. The ploughing of the wicked is sin. Every act that the wicked man does is sinful. He is unable to do good and God's wrath rests upon the fruit of their labour.



Well, I guess we're coming at this from some different perspectives. Just a few quick thoughts on that...I'm not disagreeing that every act that the wicked man does is sinful. Anything not done to the glory of God is sinful. But that doesn't mean you are not going to appreciate very much the skilled hands of a non-Christian surgeon who is operating on you. Is he doing it to the glory of God? No. Is it therefore sin? Yes. Does that mean we cannot appreciate it and even say that it reflects the image and glory of God in man, however marred and tainted it may be with sin? No. I believe a similar principle applies in the arts.



> On first glance, yes but what of the prinicple. The principle is that you would be pretenting to be someone you are not. That is a lie and is under the wrath of God.



How is that a lie? I don't get that point, which is the foundation of your argument. I see now that you get into this below, so I will hold my remarks till then.



> From the _Westminster Larger Catechism_:
> 
> *Question 143: Which is the ninth commandment?
> Answer: *The ninth commandment is, Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
> ...



I read through that whole thing, and I see nothing that speaks to drama, or that would categorize it as lying.



> "Drama is, by definition, the presentation of the life of another person, whether real or fictitious, by the assumption of that person's personality for purposes of entertainment. The key point here is that drama is possible only by assuming another's personality. Any textbook on drama will emphasize this. The "gifted" actor is the person who is able to suppress completely his own personality and assume the personality of another. The more he is able to do this, the better actor he is. He must, to be successful, assume to himself all the thoughts, all the desires, all the emotions, all the feelings of the person whose role he plays. He must, as much as he can, make himself that person. He must make himself feel as that person feels, think as that person thinks. He must, so to speak, crawl behind the skin of that man and get into his bones and marrow to lay hold of that person in the very depths of his being. He must put himself deeply inside that person so that he looks through the person's eyes, down that person's nose, and experiences all that that person feels and thinks....



I just don't see a problem with that. 



> In the second place, the sin of this can be demonstrated by means of another consideration. All will have to agree that in assuming another personality there are only two possibilities. The one possibility is that of assuming the personality of a sinner. But if an actor assumes the personality of a sinner, he must, in the nature of the case, assume all that person's sin. He must think his evil thoughts, experience his evil emotions, will his evil desires, speak his evil words, and do his evil deeds. He must assume all those sins and make them his own in a very deep and intense way."



While that *might* be possible, I don't think that has to be the case. I don't think that is something you can prove, nor that I can disprove, thus making it a rather moot point.



> Moreover, should the acts of these historical figures be played out? Who wants to see the incest of Nero pretend or otherwise? Who wants to see marriage scorned? To laugh at such things is to sin.



Should we not even read about such things then? Then you better not read the Bible. and if marriage is scorned and laughed about, perhaps that is not a movie you should see. Even if it was, you do not have to laugh at such things. Again, everything must be viewed from a biblical perspective.



> I trust you will in time



Hehe...I would say likewise, but if you are content in not viewing drama, I'm certainly not going to try to personally get you to do it. My only concern is that with this kind of thinking, we just begin to remove ourselves from the world entirely and forget about applying the gospel to every area of life.

[/quote]I would simply urge you, when you next feel the need for a fix of movie, to stop and do something wholesome with that time, sanctify your time brother. Blessings shall abound for sure.[/quote]

That is an admonition which I will take to heart (though I will still see some, because I think some can be a wholesome way to spend time)....though that is an entirely different reason than saying that drama itself is sin.


----------



## AV1611 (Aug 30, 2007)

Joel,

I have stated my case and if you do not see it yet I will not labour the point and leave it here with the WLC:

*Question 137: Which is the seventh commandment?
Answer:* The seventh commandment is, Thou shalt not commit adultery.

*Question 138: What are the duties required in the seventh commandment?
Answer:* The duties required in the seventh commandment are, chastity in body, mind, affections, words, and behavior; and the preservation of it in ourselves and others; watchfulness over the eyes and all the senses; temperance, keeping of chaste company, modesty in apparel; marriage by those that have not the gift of continency, conjugal love, and cohabitation; diligent labor in our callings; shunning all occasions of uncleanness, and resisting temptations thereunto.

*Question 139: What are the sins forbidden in the seventh commandment?
Answer: *The sins forbidden in the seventh commandment, besides the neglect of the duties required, are, adultery, fornication, rape, incest, sodomy, and all unnatural lusts; all unclean imaginations, thoughts, purposes, and affections; all corrupt or filthy communications, or listening thereunto; wanton looks, impudent or light behavior, immodest apparel; prohibiting of lawful, and dispensing with unlawful marriages; allowing, tolerating, keeping of stews, and resorting to them; entangling vows of single life, undue delay of marriage; having more wives or husbands than one at the same time; unjust divorce, or desertion; idleness, gluttony, drunkenness, unchaste company; lascivious songs, books, pictures, dancings, stage plays; and all other provocations to, or acts of uncleanness, either in ourselves or others.


God bless brother!


----------



## Covenant Joel (Aug 30, 2007)

AV1611 said:


> Joel,
> 
> I have stated my case and if you do not see it yet I will not labour the point and leave it here with the WLC:
> 
> ...



Agreeing to disagree here is probably the best thing to do. Just so you know, I'm not disagreeing with the above. There are dangers in undiscerning movie-watching. And I pray that I would not watch those that tempt me. So the part of your argument reflected above I will take to heart. But that's different than the question of whether drama itself is sin or not.

But 'nuff said about that topic. 

Blessings.


----------



## ZackF (Aug 30, 2007)

Another issue to consider is the quantity rather than merely the quality of TV viewing. Prolonged TV watching has a retarding effect on the mind. Since I live alone, I have no accountability on how much TV I watch. I could watch six hours of TV in the evening and no one would be the wiser. I certainly wouldn't.


----------



## kvanlaan (Sep 23, 2007)

> Another issue to consider is the quantity rather than merely the quality of TV viewing. Prolonged TV watching has a retarding effect on the mind. Since I live alone, I have no accountability on how much TV I watch. I could watch six hours of TV in the evening and no one would be the wiser. I certainly wouldn't.


----------

