Fundamentalist's "Sins" v Bible's "Sins"?

Taufgesinnter, What was your last church?

 

1. Is going to a movie theater sin?

enjoying most of the movies is

2. Is watching television/dvd/video a sin?

enjoying most of the programming is

3. Is attending a live theater (play) a sin?

most plays, certainly

4. Is dancing a sin?

is there ANY element of sexual stiimulation? if so, yes (spouses excepted)

5. Is using tobacco (any form) a sin?

yes, but no worse than bacon cheeseburgers

6. Is listening to rock music a sin?

most rock music, yes

7. Is using cuss words/minced oaths (4-letter anglo saxon) a sin?

yes

8. Is using playing cards a sin?

i think gambling with them is. I think all competetive games are.

9. Is playing games with dice a sin?

same as above

10. Is wearing slacks (ladies) a sin?

depends on your culture. Also, it can be quite difficult to find modest pants.

11. Is going to a public beach/mixed swimming a sin?

yes

12. Is playing pool/billiards a sin?

gambling and competetive games are sin

Bonus: Is drinking alcohol in any form a sin?

I don't think that can be proven, but I avoid it because so many Christians in America think so. Of course drunkeness is sin.

 

Dr. Bob:
You are right, we are IN the world but not OF the world.

But also, we pretty much MUST go to the store (and were I live in the rural south...all there is is a Walmart) but we don't HAVE TO go mixed swimming.

I think that Peggy summed up everything perfectly in her response.

 

I've always thought that legalist Christians and those of the world have a lot in common. Neither of them has to THINK.

Legalists can't do anything.
Worldly folks can do everything.

Those left in the middle have to read scripture, listen to the Holy Spirit, and use the common sense God gave us all.

 

I think that one main question that needs to be addressed in this thread is "Are there some sins that can be unique to a specific place or time?"

The old saying "If it's Doctrine, it's not new; and if it's new, it's not Doctrinal" comes to mind. I believe the same is true of sin.

God is unchanging: if something is now sinful, it's always been sinful (at least since the 1st sin in the Garden, and yet God knew always what constituted sin even before the Garden), and it will always be sinful. Sins can't be particular to any unique place or time. New sins aren't being "invented".

Therefore, if watching T.V. is sinful, then it's always been sinful. (Ooops, you mean that T.V. didn't exist until the last few decades? Then I would venture that the simple act of watching T.V. in-and-of-itself can't be sinful.)

Q: So what could be sinful about watching T.V.?
A: I would venture it would have to be our reaction to what we select to watch. If what we select to watch leads us to engage in actual sins (e.g. lust, pride, envy, covetneousness, etc.) then it's time for us to switch stations or use the "Off" button. A T.V. is an inanimate object, it is not & cannot be inherently sinful. It's not the action of watching T.V. that's sinful: it's our behavioral reaction to what we may select to watch that can be sinful.

As a second example, is slacks on a woman are sinful, then it would stand to reason that slacks on men only are the Biblical standard. Hmmmm, when we examine that premise though, we find no record of men wearing any type of slacks in the Bible or during Biblical times- but rather robes, which lo and behold the women of Biblical times also wore. If both genders wore the same type of garment in the Bible, it would seem then the the frequently cited verses that admonish against one gender not wearing the other's clothing, and vice-versa, must be speaking of certain other mitigating, distinguishing factors- and not on modern men's claim of exclusivity to a type of clothing (slacks) unknown during Biblical times and to the inspired Biblical writers.


Many of the things (some would argue all) on the original list are things that may or may not lead to sin, but they're not inherently sinful.

 

Quoting timothy 1769:
"8. Is using playing cards a sin?

i think gambling with them is. I think all competetive games are."


timothy,

Are you serious about competitive games? Paul even uses competitive games as a positive example in scripture!

1 Corinthians 9:24-27 Don't you know that those who run in a race all run, but one receives the prize? Run like that, that you may win. Every man who strives in the games exercises self-control in all things. Now they do it to receive a corruptible crown, but we an incorruptible. I therefore run like that, as not uncertainly. I fight like that, as not beating the air, but I beat my body and bring it into submission, lest by any means, after I have preached to others, I myself should be rejected.

 

Liberal (i.e., car-driving) Amish.

 

Yes, I think some things are sin at some time that are not at another. For instance, sex before marriage is a sin when after marriage it is not. It was a sin in the OT to wear clothing of mixed material. It is not today. We might say the same about certain practices. 50 years ago it may truly have been a sin to wear certain clothing because it was "statement" clothing that made a statement that was unbiblical. The same clothing has lost its cultural baggage today and is no longer a sin to wear. So I don't think it is cut and dried like doctrine is. I do agree with you on doctrine however.

 

I'm completely serious. I know this sounds weird, and I know the idea that competetive sports/games are fine is deeply ingrainged in our culture. But please consider the following:

Romans 12:10 Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another;

In such games, do you in honor prefer one another, or are you looking out for yourself and your side? Isn't this selfish?

Philippians 2:4 Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.

Matthew 5:38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

Matthew 5:39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

In such games, you are "attacked", and you "attack" back. Granted, you're not chopping each other's arms off, but why even pretend to resist evil in this way? Why invent and participate in entertainments where the basic idea is to toss out biblical principles?

Matthew 23:11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.

Matthew 23:12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

The tenor of these games is to strive to show your excellence (pride), defend yourself (resist evil), and defeat your opponent (preferring yourself over your brother).

I think Paul's illustrations are just that, illustrations. Jesus used wicked people to make points also, recall the parable with the evil judge and the widow.

 

Either that or it may just be to have a good time and get some exercise to profit our bodies a little. Competitive sports can be out of hand, but they don't have to be. Let's address the real issues rather than this. Anything in life can manifest those problems. It doesn't just have to be competitive sports. You would have to do virtually nothing to avoid any venue in which you could violate those verses you give.

 

Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
Either that or it may just be to have a good time and get some exercise to profit our bodies a little.

I imagine there must be ways to do these things while holding to biblical principles.

Competitive sports can be out of hand, but they don't have to be.

They are intrinsically bad in that they require ignoring certain biblical principles in the name of fun.

Let's address the real issues rather than this.

OK, I agree there are bigger problems out there, I'm just trying to answer people's questions. I've felt this way for quite awhile, the issue just never come up before. It's not a personal crusade.

Anything in life can manifest those problems.

True, but this is just entertainment and recreation. Why invent such pastimes?

It doesn't just have to be competitive sports. You would have to do virtually nothing to avoid any venue in which you could violate those verses you give.

True, but in such games the whole point involves violating these principles, the only benefit being the fun of doing so. I wish someone smarter would figure out some games that are fun and provide exercise without these problems.

I think a good point for some to consider is that there's a lot more biblical support for what I'm saying about competetive games than there is for many of our "Baptist" sins.

[ December 16, 2003, 09:01 AM: Message edited by: timothy 1769 ]

 

Competition is not inherently mean-spirited.It can bring out good qualities in us as well, such as unselfish team-spirit and hard-working dedication to a goal (the quality that Paul seems to admire in the gamesmen of his day).

In Christ,

Tim

 

Dr. Bob (Not one of the Dr. Bobs of BJU fame)said:
I grew up hearing Southrans talk about the evils of "mixed bathing". I assumed they were racists and talking about public pools/beaches
-------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------
Got married and found I quite enjoyed mixed bathing, but that's another story.

I see more "skin" in Walmart or Safeway in the summer, while never going to a beach. Does this mean to avoid "lust" I should not go to the store?

While not OF the world, we must certainly be IN the world.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[ December 20, 2003, 09:23 PM: Message edited by: C.S. Murphy ]

 

Dr. Bob (Not one of the Dr. Bobs of BJU fame)said:
I grew up hearing Southrans talk about the evils of "mixed bathing". I assumed they were racists and talking about public pools/beaches -------------------------------------------------
Got married and found I quite enjoyed mixed bathing, but that's another story.
-------------------------------------------------
So, most of us went skinny dipping as kids but I wouldn't recommend it for Christian teens. Would you?
-------------------------------------------------
I see more "skin" in Walmart or Safeway in the summer, while never going to a beach. Does this mean to avoid "lust" I should not go to the store?
-------------------------------------------------
Yes siree Bob, your list of behaviors are sinful though not necessarily sin. Sex in marriage is not sin but it is definitely sinful in any other context. See the parallel? The biggest problem with the aforementioned behaviors is that they violate the Law of Love (Law of Christ). If you don't understand my point, I suggest a carefully reading and study of Romans 14(especially vv.13-23). Understand now?

Furthermore, your spoofing of externals is way off base. Outward behavior is an indicator of a heart condition--the inner man. Christ said this. In other words, a changed heart is demonstrated by a changed life. One must differentiate between what is mere external conformity to a legalistic code to impress men and what is motivated by a changed heart, empowered by the Holy Spirit, and driven by an inner desire to please God in outward demeanor. Otherwise, you confuse the issue and muddy the water.

Dr. Bob, I suggest you re-think your questions. Your flippant thrusts at fundamentalist, Baptist convictions aren't worth serious consideration. Do you really want to discuss the issues or justify your own weak standards (cf. Romans 14:14)?

No offense intended!
-------------------------------------------------
While not OF the world, we must certainly be IN the world.
-------------------------------------------------
You mean sorta like Lot in Sodom? What does all that negative stuff in the Bible such as "be ye separate", "come out from among them", and "touch not the unclean thing" mean? It must be the archaic KJV. Huh?

Thanks Dr. Bob! (Say, did you know there is a soft drink in SC that is named DR BOB? For real!)


-------------------------------------------------

[ December 20, 2003, 09:25 PM: Message edited by: C.S. Murphy ]

 

What is naviety? Is it anything like naivete? Does it rhyme with piety?

[ December 20, 2003, 09:26 PM: Message edited by: C.S. Murphy ]

 

Dr. Bob's a good guy. We've had our discussions. Hang around and get to know him.

 

Don't worry members...this is probably a "drive by." Only time will tell if we ever see another posting.