Etcetera, etcetera, and so forth: Musicals and Morality (The King and I)

Etcetera, etcetera, and so forth: Musicals and Morality (Part Three)

This musical is quite interesting.  It is also the first musical that three of my four children have participated (including running, talking, walking, etc...).  In case you missed the picture, this musical is "The King and I."  The musical itself is available both with children actors and the more well-known version with adult actors.  Both versions are available from the Rodgers & Hammerstein website (www.rnh.com).   The musical portrays the events of the book "Anna and the King of Siam" published in 1944.

The concerns here are quite dramatic.  I would assume just like the version my children performed in, the scenes, words, and songs kept in or removed would be up to the individual director.  All in all I think my kids did a great job.  

Well back to the details.  The simple plot version.  A British teacher and her son move to the country of Siam to teach the king's children.  While there the teacher (Anna) hears and sees the activities and culture of the country of Siam (this includes the way slaves are treated).  The king of Siam is viewed as a "barbarian" but he wants the county to be viewed as modern and sophisticated.  This creates multiple humorous scenes involving British culture, Siamese culture, to include both clothes and dancing.  In the end the king dies and his son "the prince" takes over.  Ultimately the prince ends up removing some of the old cultural traditions of his father.

This quick summary does not include all the details and was not intended to.  No doubt I left out some of you favorite parts.  I am saving the comments concerning "Uncle Tom's Cabin" for later.  But I thought that was an American novel?  Just wait, we'll get to it.

First, is the reference to Moses and the Creation account as found in the Bible.  The king scoffs at the unscientific presentation of creation by Moses in six days.  This later will be a point of humor since Anna will have a similar time period to prepare for guests to arrive for a party.  Ultimately, Anna waffles on creation and talks around it.  

Second, is the issue of how the king treats slaves in his culture.  The book does more justice to the atrocities of his treatment of slaves.  The musical versions waters it down dramatically.  The musical almost treats slavery in a comical fashion in a play they perform which is adapted from the book "Uncle Toms Cabin."  The play for the king is rearranged by one of the slaves.

Third,  which is related to the second concern, is the blatant idolatry involved.  The culture is obviously of a Buddhist persuasion.  Therefore, the characters in multiple scenes ask an idol Buddha  to  help them in their situation or for wisdom.  This is simple idolatry.  Bowing and praying to an idol (even if treated in a comical fashion), is still idolatry.  This is one area repeatedly dealt with with our children in their participation in this musical.  The sad part is that in reality there are millions of people trapped in this false religion.

Obviously, discernment is needed in watching or participating in musicals of any nature.  Hopefully we don't want to embrace the extremes of throwing out all musicals or on the other end saying all musicals are okay.  Surely there are redeemable parts of our culture.  God is not neutral toward culture.  Scripture is clear certain activities and behaviors will always be evil and sinful.  And no we should not be afraid to say some parts (some more than others) of all cultures have serious problems with sin and evil.  Just to be clear it is not sufficient to simply adhere to an ad hominem argument to accuse others of _____ism for not agreeing with their own views of what is good or evil with a culture.  Too much of Christianity (and especially our unbelieving media) resorts to this line of reasoning.  Especially when this thought is considered cool, trendy, and culturally acceptable (even in churches).

Definitely worth viewing but be sure if children watch you explain Biblical issues of concern with them (of course, if they are of appropriate age). 

Comments as always encouraged. 

The Unbelieving World has Unleashed All-Out War on Christmas

The Unbelieving World has Unleashed All-Out War on Christmas

Unbelievers have gone to great lengths to remove the word Christmas for our culture.  They have winter breaks and Happy Holidays but they go through endless lengths to avoid the word Christmas.

Enjoy!!!

And enjoy you remaining days till Christmas.

Liberal and Feminist Controlled State (Public) Schools and Culture War on Boys: God Made them Boys

State School and Culture War on Boys

As a dad with two boys obviously I am concerned when Boys are not encouraged to be Boys.
Androgynous political correct speech will not help our boys to become men to lead, provide, and protect their families.  I don't want a socialist game system where everyone wins.  Its a fact.  I want competition.  This same boys grow up to be status quo workers with no motivation to succeed.

I would like to recommend both a video and a book.  Educate yourself and raise your boys to be boys.  God created them boys not girls.  They are not boys who think they are girls.  They are genetically what God made them to be: BOYS!!!

This may not sound politically correct.  Good.  I have no intention on pampering your hurt feelings.
Hebrews 11 discusses fighting wars by faith.  Throughout the Old Testament wars are fought by men protecting their families and conquering the enemy.

Also take a good heart searching read of Douglas Wilson's book Future Men.


Educate yourself.  Raise your boys to be future men.  But for now if they are boys.  Then let them be boys.

Enjoy!

Spirit-Filled Singing: Seeking Clarification and Definition (Part Two)

Music Series Part One

Spirit-Filled Singing

What is Spirit-filled singing?  Or for that matter, Spirit-filled music?  Paul had to mean something specific.  For this article, the attempt at addressing the music issue will focus on with Ephesians 5.

Ephesians 5:18-19 are as follows, "And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit; speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord."

The  focus on music and singing immediately follows two imperatives, both of which appear as present passive verbs.  The theological debate concerning the filling is not the intent of this article. On the other hand, the verbs which follow are our concern.  Verses 19-21 contain a series of participles.  As I understand it these participles are the result of Spirit-filling.  They are as follows:

Verse 19, "speaking, singing, and making melody"

Verse 20, "Giving thanks"

Verse 21, "Submitting yourselves"

As best I can tell, the first four participles are present active participles and the fifth is a present passive participle.  The intermittent prepositional phrases are taken the same way as in the previous article addressing the sister passage in Colossians 3.

Back to our original focus.  Spirit-filling directly affects or controls our music.  Specifically, our use of psalms, hymns and spiritual songs is of great concern.  So Paul has repeated the exact same phraseology in two different epistles to two different local churches (Ephesians and Colossians).  

So how do we actually evaluate what is spirit-filled music?  Please rest assured I am neither the first nor the last person to ask and wrestle with this question.  By what parameters or criteria do we use to evaluate music?  This is no small matter.  When do local culture and/or context become a factor?  Does every culture have an element of "worldliness"?   Or have too many cultures and music become so intertwined that a difference can no longer be established?

Do numbers serve as a gauge or litmus test for spirit-filled music?  If numbers are important, and pragmatism rules then consider the following (not music related):

1.  How dare anyone attack Joel Osteen (if numbers are our criteria for Spirit blessing)?

2. How dare anyone attack Bill Hybels or a Willow Creek (again, if numbers are the standard)?

3. What of people like Rick Warren, John Piper, or Rob Bell?

If the reasons are preaching, theology, practice or whatever the reasons are you object to the above individuals, then how do we evaluate when God is actually blessing a ministry?  How much church history and practice must we reject to create yet again standards for God's blessing?

Does it require my agreement?  Hope not.

Hope this helps some.  May create more questions than answers.

Comments of course encouraged as always.

Post-Exile Sabbath Observance (Part Three)

Series Part One     Series Part Two

Post-Exile Sabbath Observance and the Sabbath/Lord's Day Issue

So if you had the law again after 70 years of captivity and were free to practice (obey) it again, which parts would you extract as most important?  Which parts would you be most zealous to reinstate (I am assuming they did not observe the sabbath in any form during captivity)?

Would you reinstate the sabbath?  Or would you be glad to throw off the law under the guise of legalistic oppression?  Again as reminder, does this text only apply to that time period or..... Consider Nehemiah 10: 28-33.

Two keys items were highlighted: relation to culture (v. 30) and sabbath observance (vv. 31-33).

First in relation to culture there is a clear reference for believers not to marry unbelievers.  So is the descriptive or prescriptive?  Three chapters later Nehemiah (13:23-31) this idea of intermarriage with the surrounding culture is brought up again.  Here Nehemiah actually calls it "sin" and "evil" (v. 26-27).  So even if this is only descriptive, the people still refused to obey explicit commands (prescriptive) given to Israel in Deut 25 related to intermarriage without the surrounding culture.  Is it possible that the NT would repeat this concept of not being "unequally yoked" with unbelievers?  Even if you don't believe this applies to marriage, you have to at least acknowledge there is a command to limit interaction between the two.

Second in relation to the sabbath there is a clear reference not to be entangled in unnecessary business on the sabbath.  Even if this does not apply to the Lord's day, I'm still glad Chick Fil A is closed on the Lord's Day.  I applaud any business that chooses to do so.

This issue is obviously a concern to Nehemiah.  He brings it up in 13:15-22 (same as the intermarriage issue).  Again he describes their practice of business on the sabbath as "evil" (v. 17-18).
So same question needs repeated: Is this merely descriptive or prescriptive for today?
They obviously still tried to apply it after being in captivity for 70 years.  I am convinced that even if it was commanded of us Christians would still find a way to avoid obeying it.

We could test case tithing, it still finds ways to be ignored (Abraham received them before the law was given)?

We could test case the sabbath as well (of course the connection with the Lord's day is needed), this is where we will turn our attention?

We still will need to address the passages related to not being under the law and liberty/conscience issues.

I'm afraid with the infatuation that even Christians have with sports on the Lord's day, dropping Lord's day evening attendance, and even pastoral lack of concern will never allow this issue to get the weight it once had when we still had "blue laws."  I am certain our Christian churches are not a Plymouth plantation.

Hope this helps.  More to come.
Comments encouraged.