News: Wheaton College to allow dancing?

Hey, I was edited for an offensive slang word, which I didn't think was offensive. Where is the list of word's we can and cannot use?

Somehow I doubt they are CHOOSING to dress in this manner, more like it they are FORCED to dress this way. And it may be alot of things but a stand for Godliness is not one of them, not by a long shot!

 

If you think something may be an offensive word just go for the safe side and don't use it, there are plenty of words in the English language that you can pick a substitute. If you make an honest mistake and it gets edited, don't feel bad, happens to the best of us. Just use common sense.
As far as Joshua's comment, I do find it inappropriate for any male, OR female, to make sexual jokes or comments to someone they are not married to. If a topic does have to turn to that type of discussion, there are private men and women's forums where you can take it to.

Now, the discussion is on Wheaton College and their lift of the ban on dancing. The thread is closing soon, so does anyone else have comments or answers related to the discussion topic? Here is the original question.
"What's this I hear about Wheaton College deciding to allow dancing on campus? Anyone have details/sources?"
Gina

 

I am.

 

Born Again, apparently I'm on your "Ignore List" so I couldn't PM you with this question: Which thread? I've seen threads get closed because they were redundant, and also because people responding to me became vitriolic, but I'm not aware of a single thread ever being closed because I replied in a way that was inappropriate. Heck, the only post (out of the thousands I have made) for which I was ever censured was one in which I identified the base insticts to which I believe fundamentalism caters.

 

Does this sound to anybody like it's coming from minds that lean toward "sexual predation"?

Hmm.....

 

A lot of you are calling it legalism just because some of us feel it is wrong to go to dances or to wear a certain uniform in a Christian School. I went to a Christian School, had to wear cullotes. Did it kill me? NO. Did I like them? NO. But they were the rules and that is in anything we do. It's like wearing a uniform for work, we may not like it but we have to wear it. So, is that legalism? Everyone of us who have children can probably be called legalistic in one way or another. What we decide that is right for our children doesn't mean others think it's right. In fact they may call you legalistic. To raise our children, to say going to dances is wrong, is our choice. It's between God and us not anyone else. So to say it's legalistic is wrong. Parents will make mistakes and may even carry things a bit far. Who answers? WE DO! I'm not perfect, (I always tell my hubby that I am lolol) but I strive to do what I feel the Lord would have me to do. As I said before, I LOVE TO DANCE. I have a conviction about letting my children go to dances. I might not have a conviction about it if it were just my big family. You know, cousins, Aunts dancing with each other lolol. I'm not against that at all. You shouldn't judge someone elses convictions because you don't have the same ones. My God will judge me.

Jesus Never Fails,
Mary

 

James,

Hardly. I don't think either of these men - or women who think similarly - are sexual predators because they prefer to date people who will have sex with them. These are consenting, peer relationships we are talking about, not ones that involve any abuse of authority or power.

Joshua

 

Sure Joshua.... Whatever you say... We know...

Considering going to a church because you think the girls would be "easy"...

How sad...

 

Maybe not Joshua; but it certainly makes them fornicators. I guess that's one way to get them to go to church!

However, dancing can lead to that in certain circumstances (which is what this thread was about in the first place).

Good post Mary!

Sue

 

I didn't say it was right. Just that it didn't make them predators.

Joshua

 

Why is it that every time standards are mentioned someone with a liberal bent turns the word "legalism"? Legalism is only associated with your view of salvation. Standards are group oriented and Family oriented. If you don't agree you get out of the group or you choose the path of rebellion in your family.
Everyone has standards. Read the BOOK. God has standards too!!!

 

When I went to college back in the "dark ages", the Baptist University that I attended was for women only. There were four rules that if we broke them, we would be expelled. I am sure there were others. Card Playing, drinking alcohol beverages, dancing, and smoking.

We could wear shorts for PE classes but had to wear a dress across campus or change in the gym.

Jeans could be worn but not in the main public areas or class rooms. We had required chapel every day, too.

I'm not sure about the rules today, but when I have been on campus, I have seen smoking, card playing, very casual dress and it is now co-ed. (not that that had anything to do with rules changing) I do know that there are many fine Christian men and women who receive their degrees there and continue to serve the Lord.

 

Invariably, you intimate that there is no problem with all these things you say. Then, when you are called on it, you back down.

 

Working for the U.S. Postal service can lead to workplace shootings, but there are many steps in between. The same goes for dancing. There is no necessary connection between dancing and fornication.

 

You feel it is wrong to wear a certain uniform in a Christian school???

If I understand what you mean and not what you wrote, I would simply say that it becomes legalism when one's personal preferences become matters of right and wrong for everyone else. Most Christian schools with which I am familiar that have the standards described above have them b/c they feel it is WRONG to dance or WRONG for a woman to wear pants or a boy to wear shorts, etc. It is not a matter of preference. For them, it is a matter of RIGHT or WRONG.

Yes you have the right to maintain any preference you so desire, but you do not have the right to make extra-biblical preferences defining marks of spirituality. In other words, you do not have the right to say a person who dances or wears shorts or does not wear those awful-looking things called coullotes is living in sin.

Once this happens, you have crossed into the world of legalism.

My point exactly (except I would substitute the word preferences for convictions).

 

Why is it everytime a legalists is called a spade they begin to cry "legalism is only associated with salvation" ???

And why is it that someone who has different preferences than a legalist is always accused of being a liberal???

BTW, liberalism has nothing to do with preferences, standards, or personal convictions, and everything to do with one's theology.

 

Yes you have the right to maintain any preference you so desire, but you do not have the right to make extra-biblical preferences defining marks of spirituality. In other words, you do not have the right to say a person who dances or wears shorts or does not wear those awful-looking things called coullotes is living in sin.


I didn't say it was a sin, now did I?

 

[ February 25, 2003, 04:58 PM: Message edited by: journeyheaven ]