Table of Contents
Introduction (by Natalie)
I was around nine years old when my dental hygienist thoughtfully changed the TV channel to a kids’ show. I tried to look away, but soon became frustrated, “Can you please turn that off?!” I blurted out. Another time, someone let me watch a DVD version of “Finding Nemo” on a home computer. I thought this would be okay—after all it was a DVD on a computer not a movie on a TV. To my sorrow, an older Holiness adult explained afterwards that it was still wrong. No longer did I have the testimony of “I’ve never watched a movie.” I felt guilty and defiled—had I let God down? I was determined not to make another mistake. For years to come, I adamantly rejected invitations to watch a movie, I practiced averting my eyes from TVs in public places, and I sternly warned other youth and adults alike about the dangers of watching anything on a TV.
During my involvement in Holiness Pentecostalism, my beliefs were fully supported and reinforced by campmeeting preaching. Movies are sinful. Television is sinful. These facts were taken for granted just as much as the “fact” that women’s pants are an abomination. But not too long ago, I found myself in a social gathering with quite a few people who are still active members of independent Holiness Pentecostal churches, even in ministry. To my surprise, the topic of conversation was their favorite movies.
I understand that Holiness standards change (I discussed that at length in this article). I find it concerning, however, when they change without teaching or explanation. It’s extremely rare for a pastor to plainly tell the congregation, “I’ve been preaching that XYZ is sinful and wrong for fifteen years and want to apologize for any confusion I’ve caused. After further study of Scripture, thought, and prayer, my position has changed; I’ll explain why in this sermon. If you have any questions, please come talk to me. I respect that we may differ on this issue.” Instead, the pattern is for leadership to simply stop preaching against XYZ and then, over time, begin doing it themselves. This causes confusion and instability among the congregation.
Of all the shifting Holiness standards, movies and TV are especially important to discuss because much electronic entertainment actually is inappropriate, even sinful in nature, and discretion is necessary. Hyper fundamentalism, unfortunately, perpetuates black and white thinking and teaching. Many things are painted as either all good or all bad, and in the past, movies and TV have been no exception—they’ve been painted as all bad. It’s troubling to see friends realize that TV/movies are not all bad, only to put them in the “all good” category instead.
In the following article, Nathan dives into this important topic. Not only does he address the overgeneralization that all TV and movies are sinful, but he also discusses how we as believers can apply relevant Scriptural principles and navigate electronic entertainment in a God-honoring way.
—Natalie
Examining the Arguments Against TV (By Nathan)
Holiness movements have long been defined by their stance against many forms of entertainment. Given their general focus on regulating the limited areas of spiritual life that are visible to outsiders, appearance and entertainment have always been what most of their standards address. In the earlier predecessors of these movements, things like plays, the radio, card games, fairs, and even hayrides made the list. With the advent of movies and television, those quickly became the focal point, and hayrides were largely forgotten about. In my youth (in Independent Holiness Pentecostal churches), it was common to hear TV referred to as “the one-eyed devil.”
Because technology changes quickly, it was difficult for Holiness churches to preach against all new forms of entertainment. When I was young, TV was unacceptable, but computer games were considered okay or never addressed. YouTube was also in its infancy and also considered okay. Smartphones largely took Holiness church leaders by surprise, and they woke up one morning to find that everyone in their congregation had a TV in their pocket even though they would never allow one in their living room.
I hear that some churches are now abandoning the “no movies” standard, as their forefathers abandoned previous restrictions on entertainment. However, it is still standard practice to restrict it, and even in places where the standards change, they often do so with little guidance on why the rule changed or how to navigate the new freedom.
It’s worth noting that all of these forms of media have numerous purposes beyond pure entertainment from sharing about the news of the day, to travel shows about foreign lands, to historical documentaries, to streaming church services, to DIY home improvement videos. All these things tend to give more credence to the valuable applications of the video medium, but for the sake of an interesting discussion, I’ll focus on content that primarily serves as entertainment since that raises the strongest objections.
As with other standards that restrict Christian liberty, the burden of proof must be on the shoulders of the restrictor. If I tell you that Christians can’t wear baseball caps, it’s up to me to prove it in scripture, not up to you to prove they are acceptable.
To give the “TV is sin” camp a fair hearing, I’ll go to the argument made in the Holiness Handbook, which is generally reflective of other arguments I’ve heard. I’ll keep the author of that work’s words in red for clarity.
Arguments from Culture and Statistics
“We learn in Ephesians 2:2 that Satan is the prince of the power of the air. Is it any surprise that he has used television and to a lesser degree radio (across the air ways) to weaken the morality of our country and the world? Television and movie theaters may have seemed harmless enough in the beginning (early 1900s), but even then the Holiness preachers at that time condemned them as sinful. They must have had discernment to what the devil had planned, as we see that it has gradually eroded the convictions of our nation and the world.”
The Bible says the Devil rules the lower atmosphere or “air,” which is essentially another way of saying he is the “prince of this world (John 12:31).” The author opens with this observation and suggests that he believes that Satan has special influence over electromagnetic communication since it travels through the atmosphere.
Of course, if that were true, there’s no reason to believe the Devil’s playground would be limited to the frequency band that the FCC has assigned for radio and TV. Other forms of electromagnetic communication (exact same thing, different energy levels) include nuclear radiation, microwaves, and visible light. So, X-rays, Hot Pockets, and the Sun are all things we should be suspicious of. Not to mention sound, which travels through the air in a more direct way than electromagnetic radiation. Even if this far-fetched interpretation is correct, then it basically means we must be suspicious of all forms of communication and gives us no special insight on television vis-a-vis books (which require visible electromagnetic radiation to be read).
He is doubtless correct to point out that Holiness preachers have long denounced TV and movies, which makes recent changes on the issue call into question the wisdom of maintaining any standard based on the fact that “it’s the old-time way.” This is one in a long line of standards and doctrines that most or all of the Holiness movement has abandoned (the movement the Holiness Handbook is associated with in particular). And yet, without losing their strong sense of self-righteousness, they’re “the only ones who haven’t compromised.”
Has television eroded the convictions of our nation? It’s fair to say that our nation is less Christian-oriented than it was when television was invented. A few things have gotten more Christian (the abolishment of segregation, reduction in sexism, etc.), but many things have gotten worse (the acceptability of numerous sexual sins, abortion, atheism, lack of purpose, etc.).
However, before we blame the medium of television, it’s worth asking the question, “If television didn’t exist, was moral decline still possible?” Could print magazines have been the carriers of the sexual revolution? Could the New Left and its dogma have arisen in academic journals and been popularized by grassroots activists and print newspapers? Moral decline has certainly happened in other places without television. Ancient Israel experienced moral decline on the regular. It’s certainly feasible that mass communication accelerates the pace of cultural change, but that would be for good or ill, and the direction of change would be determined by the character and institutions of the nation, not the available technology.
“The movie ‘Gone with the Wind’ (released in 1939) is credited (or discredited) as the first movie to have actors using profanity. Many people of that day were appalled by this use of foul language but it only opened the door for Hollywood and the devil to condition the American people by gradually slipping more and more sinfully acts into their broadcasts.”
This observation is a simple post hoc fallacy. Movies in the ‘30s were less indecent than they are today, so the author assumes that movies made Americans less decent. It’s just as likely that Americans became less decent, and the films they watch reflect that fact. Again, perhaps the medium accelerated the rate of change, but why would it influence the direction?
Furthermore, one of the first films ever made (and the first one screened in the White House) is a 1915 silent film called “The Birth of a Nation.” This film was incredibly racist in its depictions of African Americans and was credited with the rebirth of the KKK. Such a film would not be a commercial success today. If we’re blaming the film medium for the popularization of profanity, wouldn’t we then also be forced to credit it for the massive reduction in racism over the last century? Or we could adopt the more likely deduction that films reflect rather than dictate the character of the people who make them.
“In 1938, at the very dawn of the age of television, news anchorman, E.B. White stated these words: ‘I believe TV is going to be the test of the modern world, and in this new opportunity to see beyond the range of our vision, we shall discover either a new and unbearable disturbance of the general peace or a saving radiance in the sky. We shall stand or fall by TV, of that I am quite sure.’ Well, we have had many decades to put TV to the test, and it has definitely failed miserably. Not only has TV become “an unbearable disturbance,” it has become one of Satan’s chief devices in his deceitful plot to destroy our churches and our nation’s moral culture. Statistics from 2005 indicated that ninety-seven percent of all American homes have at least one TV with most having two or more.”
There is a rich tradition of new technologies having their effects overstated for good and ill. Most of these remarks from the past are more comical than prescient. Looking back at the things that caused most threat to humanity in the 20th century, they were mostly ideologies (Communism, Nazism, and Fascism) that have no obvious connection with TV.
It’s fair enough to observe that a given medium of communication has done more harm than good for our nation’s morals. In fact, the Bible makes the same observation in James 3:6 “And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.”
The Bible has even worse things to say about the medium of speech than the Holiness handbook has to say about TV. The tongue is powered by the fires of hell. What the Bible does not do is use this observation as justification for a command to avoid the medium of speech and cut our tongues off.
On the contrary, the fact that Satan uses the medium of speech to do great damage (and print, TV, radio, and the telegraph), is why God commands us to redeem the tongue and use it for building up rather than tearing down (Ephesians 4:29). “Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.”
I’m confident we can apply this guidance to all mediums of communication, from sign language to signal flags. The fact that TV is so prevalent intensifies the need for Christians to use this medium well in content creation and enjoyment. And 99.99% of American households have a tongue, with most having two or more, so the prevalence of a mode of communication isn’t an argument against it.
“Some people use the excuse that I only watch the News or Family programs, but from what I hear, the commercials are as full of ungodliness as the programming! Even the results of secular studies prove the negative effects of television on our society (see a few of the many negative findings below. You can also find resources in the library or Internet with more statistics): (Can you identify any real benefits from television?)”
There are two components to this claim. The first is that, no matter what you watch, the commercials are so bad that you shouldn’t watch them. Doubtless, many commercials intentionally stoke various ungodly passions from greed to lust. But commercials are everywhere, not constrained to video media. Advertisements are prevalent on the internet, radio, in print media, by mail, on billboards, and in all stores. If the presence of ungodly advertising is a sufficient rationale to avoid something altogether, then Christians will need to abstain from all information and commerce.
The second is that television has numerous harms. I will attempt to address this claim fairly because I think this is a fair claim. Many of the things that Holiness preachers denounce are self-evidently harmless. My $50 titanium wedding ring comes to mind. TV and other forms of electronic entertainment do have more downside risks.
This is one of the issues with a “boy who cried wolf” philosophy of banning everything. It’s a bit difficult to parse out real risk when you have a handbook that lumps in contemporary Christian music with pornography as things the Devil uses to destroy believers. That said, while I think there is a real risk here, many of his claims are overstated.
“1) Children spend more time learning about life through media than in any other manner. The average child spends approximately 28 hours a week watching television, which is more than they spend in school.”
Yes, kids spend too much time in front of screens. This is mostly a parenting choice, and some parents are much better at managing this than others. Just because some kids watch too much TV doesn’t mean your kid should necessarily watch none, any more than the fact that most kids eat too much sugar means your kids should eat none.
“2) The average American child will witness over 200,000 acts of violence on television including 16,000 murders before age 18.”
Yes, there is a lot of content on TV that is inappropriate for children. There are a lot of books in your library that are inappropriate for children as well. This does raise the question, “What level of exposure to violence is appropriate?” For Biblical reasons, I suspect it is some amount greater than zero.
Violence is a part of the human condition whether exercised appropriately, like a cop restraining a resisting criminal, or inappropriately. It has long been the centerpiece of entertainment, from Homer’s Odyssey to Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. Furthermore, violence is recorded at length in Scripture. Kids can learn stories about people being decapitated, eaten by lions, burned alive, and run through with spears without ever leaving Sunday school.
Kids shouldn’t watch or read everything adults do, but that’s different than thinking they need to be completely insulated from violence until their 18th birthday.
“3) A study of population data for various countries showed homicide rates doubling within the 10 to 15 years after the introduction of television, even though television was introduced at different times in each site examined.”
This study from 1989 was based on only three countries (I can only assume this is the one he was referring to). Three data points are not enough for a reliable natural experiment, so the causation cannot be inferred. Additionally, immediately after this research was published, America experienced a sharp decrease in homicide for over a decade. Television did not become less popular in the ’90s, so we can safely assume that it was neither the cause of the crime rise or decrease.
“4) Studies suggest that higher rates of TV viewing are correlated with increased tobacco usage, alcohol intake and younger onset of sexual activity.”
As a matter of correlation, this is doubtless true. However, higher levels of TV viewing are also correlated with more negligent or permissive parents. I strongly suspect that the primary causal driver is the parenting style more so than the TV. Especially because all three of the ills listed require kids to be unattended around other kids outside of their home—a surefire indicator of permissive parenting.
“5) Forty-six percent of all television violence identified by the study took place in children’s cartoons. Children’s programs were least likely to depict the long-term consequences of violence (5%) and they portray violence in a humorous fashion 67% of the time.”
Yes, a lot of kids’ cartoons are violent. In my experience, this is particularly true of older cartoons, from the era when people are fond of saying that they would bring their guns to “show and tell.” It’s not clear that Bugs Bunny’s antics caused anyone to be violent back then. But you can make a sensible argument against letting your kids watch violent cartoons. Mine don’t. This is something parents control.
“6) The average television watcher now sits entranced for 7.2 hours per day.”
Good news, they’re on their phones now… But in all seriousness, yes, people spend a lot of time with electronic entertainment. However, just because 16 hours a day is too much sleep, that doesn’t infer that the optimal amount of sleep is 0 hours a day. The same is true for TV.
“I dare say that most professing Christians know all the actors and the details of the popular shows and movies, but the same ones would struggle to name the books of the Bible or many of its characters! Where are our hearts and minds? Evidently not in the word of God! What are we teaching our Children by exposing them to this filth? How vile will the broadcasts be for future generations? The next time you find yourself watching a movie or show with profanity and lewdness, ask yourself if you would be ashamed if Jesus came at that time. Would God be pleased with the violence, profanity, homosexuality, nudity, and other sinful acts that are shown through the TV in your home? Would you equally welcome these same people or acts into your home to educate you and your children to their lifestyles? What are you demonstrating to your children and others with the programming that you watch and welcome into your house?”
Familiarity with culture is not a bad thing. Paul quoted pagan philosophers and poets in his address to the Athenians because he was familiar with their culture. That didn’t mean he endorsed all aspects of it, but he was conversant about it. There’s nothing wrong with a Christian knowing who Tom Cruise is any more than it’s wrong for a Christian to know about Thomas Jefferson. Neither are Christians, but both had a significant influence on America and may be the subjects of normal conversation.
Ironically, I never got a good grounding for reading and interpreting scripture until I got around some Christians who watched TV, but also went to seminary to study Greek and Hebrew. As it turns out, the hyper-spiritual people I grew up around who wouldn’t be caught dead in front of a TV were also really awful at reading and interpreting scripture. From this I can induce that the mere fact that one spends some time watching electronic media does not mean he is necessarily less equipped to rightly divide the word of truth than someone who watches none.
The fact that you shouldn’t allow a TV to raise your kids and that you should restrict yourself to shows you wouldn’t be ashamed for Jesus to watch seems fair. But Jesus’ television tolerance should factor in that he spent a lot of time around sinners (prostitutes, tax collectors, drunkards, etc.). Although he wouldn’t have participated, I’m sure in that company Jesus heard some colorful words and stories you wouldn’t let your kids hear.
Furthermore, the fact that some television would offend your conscience if Jesus walked in while you were enjoying it implies that there is some television that would not offend your conscience. An argument against some electronic entertainment is not an argument against all.
Arguments from Scripture
“You may say that you don’t see TV as sin, but the verse above tells us to lay aside every weight and sin. Can it be denied that it is a weight that vexes our souls like Sodom did Lot’s (see the verse below)? Even Lot’s wife looked back at what she left and was turned to a pillar of salt. Had her soul been vexed to the point that she accepted these wrongs as right? Do you now accept wrong as right? Dictionary definition :
VEXED – Teased; provoked; irritated; troubled; agitated; disquieted; afflicted.
2 Peter 2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an example unto those that after should live ungodly; 2:7 And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked: 2:8 (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds);”
Note that the meaning of the word “conversation” is one of several archaic words from the King James Version that look like words you know, but actually had a substantially different meaning. As the King James translators intended it, “conversation” referred to conduct, not speech.
The author is arguing that exposure to sin desensitizes us. One may be able to make a biblical case for that, but you can’t simply use any passage of scripture to do so. There’s nothing in this verse or story that supports that claim. Peter is saying that Lot was “vexed” or “tormented” by the way in which the wicked of Sodom and Gomorrah lived. In other words, he saw the sin, he was bothered by it, and he left.
The author then conjectures that Lot’s wife saw the sin, and was desensitized by it, which was her demise. It’s just as possible that she was predisposed to liking the sin due to her own choices and this had nothing to do with “vexation.” In any event, this scripture doesn’t tell us. Even if it did… it has nothing to do with TV. It would be a better application of the passage to encourage people to stay away from sinners rather than depictions of sin, but even that application would run directly contrary to the example set by Jesus.
In sections before and after this bit of commentary, the author provides a large volume of scripture but doesn’t explicitly connect most of it to his argument. Note that you need to analyze each scripture offered on an issue, and not be overwhelmed by the volume of verses someone cites.
These are some verses he cites that don’t seem relevant to the point at issue:
“Abstain from all appearance of evil” 1 Thessalonians 5:22
Addressed at length elsewhere, this verse can’t mean to avoid a form of communication because some bad content is communicated through it, or that would rule out all forms of communication, including reading.
“Mine eye affecteth mine heart” Lamentations 3:51
This verse is out of context. In context, the writer is saying his heart is sad because of the destruction he sees in his land.
“Be ye not partakers with them” Ephesians 5:7
A command not to participate in sin doesn’t prove television is sin.
“Love not the world” 1 John 2:15
Enjoying entertainment doesn’t require loving the kingdom of darkness.
“Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery” Matthew 5:28
True, but watching video media doesn’t require you to lust anymore than eschewing video media prevents you from lust (none of Jesus’ hearers had TV, yet they managed to lust).
“A double minded man is unstable in all his ways” James 1:8
This verse is out of context. In context, this verse is about people who ask God for wisdom without faith. Even out of context, I fail to see what this verse has to do with TV.
“Woe to them that call evil good” Isaiah 5:20
True, but watching moving pictures does not require you to do this.
“He that is begotten of God keepeth himself [from sin]” 1 John 5:18
This doesn’t provide any evidence that the silver screen is sin.
“Honor the Lord with thy substance, and with the first fruits of all thine increase” Proverbs 3:9
A verse about tithing isn’t a verse about how you spend your time. There are verses for both things, but they are not interchangeable, because the Bible has different teachings on those things.
“Lay apart all filthiness” James 1:21
Not all things in videos are filthy.
“Purify your hearts, ye double minded” James 4:8
In context, this verse is about people who quarrel and have unholy desires, not about people who watch TV.
If you’re counting, this means the author has now brought up 13 passages of scripture that are either of dubious relevance to the issue or out of context. This is a pretty poor track record for someone allegedly basing standards on God’s word. Intermingled with these verses, he appears to have four biblical arguments that are strong enough to merit addressing.
Before delving into them, it’s worth restating my position on the matter. Electronic entertainment is like a stove; it has many good applications, but it has also harmed people. It’s not something kids should play with unsupervised. I could generate a long list of people who have been harmed by stoves. That wouldn’t be sufficient evidence that you need to remove your stove, but it would be a good reason to be thoughtful about how you use it.
Here is some biblical guidance from the Holiness Handbook that I think is relevant to this issue.
“Think on good things” Philippians 4:8
Yes, this is a relevant biblical teaching. We should actively fill our minds with things that are honest, just, lovely, and pure. This is important in part because that kind of information doesn’t tend to flow to us; we have to seek it out. In context, Paul is talking about how to not be anxious. His solution of gratitude and filling your mind with good things is sound advice.
Wholesome entertainment can fit this bill and be uplifting. Stories of fiction and non-fiction where right prevails over wrong, the downtrodden are lifted up, and the proud are laid low have always been standard fare. Documentaries chronicle the wonder of God’s creation and allow us to marvel at sights we will never see in person. Films about history allow us to see God’s sovereignty in the human story.
While wholesome content isn’t produced at the frequency we’d like to see, we have no one to blame but ourselves. A couple of generations of preachers (from many denominations) dismissed the entertainment industry as godless rather than challenging the church to make it godly. If a few hundred missionaries and ministers had become salt and light in the entertainment industry, our culture would be in a much better shape.
Fortunately, some have, and there are numerous companies that produce content with a Judeo-Christian worldview. Not all of this content carries an explicit gospel message, but it doesn’t need to in order to honor God (any more than the work done by a carpenter to the glory of God requires a gospel message inscribed upon it). Christians should actively support this content as they are able, because in supporting this entertainment, we are supporting the spread of the gospel and the preconditions for reception of the gospel.
“I will set no wicked thing before mine eye (Psalms 101:3); shut your eyes from seeing evil (Isaiah 33:15); an evildoer listens to wicked lips (Proverbs 17:4); shun profane babblings (1 Timothy 2:16)”
The Bible teaches that we are to avoid watching and listening to evil, and particularly taking pleasure in that observation. This is a good argument against pornography, in which people watch the sin of fornication for pleasure. There are certainly movies shown in theaters that also depict evil for your enjoyment; sexual sin, revenge, and greed are common ones.
There are limits to this teaching, however. The passages about “shutting your eyes from seeing evil” are both in an Old Testament poetic context and use a certain amount of hyperbole. Jesus did not literally shut his eyes whenever he saw a Pharisee or a tax collector, even though those men were often doing evil within his observation.
Similarly, if we’re going to take seriously Jesus’ command to visit the prisoner and be concerned about the plight of the widow and orphan, we’re also going to have to be exposed to a certain amount of evil. If we’re going to be good citizens of our nation, we will need to have some awareness of current events, many of which involve evil. Monasticism is not the way to fulfill our obligation to be ambassadors of reconciliation.
The Bible also recounts numerous instances of evil, such as rape, murder, and mass slaughter, as a backdrop against which to accentuate the triumph of good over evil. The Bible isn’t typically graphic in its depiction of evil, but neither is it overly euphemistic. Entertainment that uses the same strategy as the Bible is clearly not in violation of the Bible’s commands.
“Lay aside every weight” Hebrews 12:1
Yes, the Bible teaches that we should abstain from activities that slow us down in our Christian walk, even if they aren’t sins, per se. However, the Bible also teaches us how we are to determine what those are. Addressed at length elsewhere, these teachings boil down to “What does your conscience allow?” and “Does this action have the effect of leading to sin in your life or the life of people around you?”
The Bible does not attempt to list out these weights, even though it could. It could have easily forbidden Greco-Roman theater, which was very popular at the time. I’ve personally stood in the ruins of theaters in several of the cities Paul wrote to. The fact God didn’t attempt to ban these things outright shows that His priorities are in a different place than hyper-fundamentalist teachers.
A biblical understanding of avoiding “weights” should lead us to exercise personal discernment, not ban an entire form of media for all purposes and all people.
Argument from Time Management
“Redeeming the time.” Ephesians 5:16 “Can watching TV be characterized as ‘redeeming the time because the days are evil’? I seriously doubt that God thinks so!”
I have two responses to this argument:
- A moderate amount of entertainment is a good use of time
Yes, the Bible teaches us to use our time well, but it would be a grave mistake to think that all uses that are not “spiritual” are a waste of time.
In Deuteronomy 14, the law lays out how one of several tithes was to be conducted. People who lived far away from Jerusalem were to sell a tenth of their produce, travel to the place God chose (eventually Jerusalem), and spend that money as follows (v. 25-26): “then you shall exchange it for money, take the money in your hand, and go to the place which the Lord your God chooses. And you shall spend that money for whatever your heart desires: for oxen or sheep, for wine or similar drink [KJV says “strong drink”], for whatever your heart desires; you shall eat there before the Lord your God, and you shall rejoice, you and your household.”
So, these are God’s instructions, “take 10% of your annual income and spend that on a party” (at which God specifically says to include alcoholic beverages). Think about how big a party you could throw for 10% of your annual income. Now think about how big a waste you would be told that is in terms of both time and money. Yet this is what God commanded.
In the Old Testament and New, we are told that God wants us to enjoy the things we have.
In Ecclesiastes 9:7-10, both work and leisure are commended: “Go thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart; for God now accepteth thy works. Let thy garments be always white; and let thy head lack no ointment. Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest all the days of the life of thy vanity, which he hath given thee under the sun, all the days of thy vanity: for that is thy portion in this life, and in thy labour which thou takest under the sun. Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might;“
1 Timothy 6:17 states “trust [not] in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy;” In context, these instructions to rich people tell them to “be rich in good works,” but don’t tell them to forswear their wealth, but rather to be grateful for it and enjoy it with God’s blessing.
Music, dancing, storytelling, and feasting were the preferred amusements of Biblical times. All are recorded and none are condemned. Not to mention that the average bible character probably spent a lot of time watching cooking fires burn.
God is very much in touch with the fact that we are humans and need to do things other than pray and read the Bible. God created people to need and/or enjoy sleep, tasty and healthy food, a regular day of rest, feasts, work, and even sex. These are all creaturely limits created by God’s good design before sin entered the picture. When you add to that the hardship of a fallen world with its thorns and pain, our need for rest and relaxation is intensified.
Of course, all things must be taken in moderation. You can do too much of any of the good things mentioned above. But the fact that you do some of them doesn’t make you an unspiritual human. It makes you a human in touch with the design specifications set by your Creator. If you load 4,000 pounds into a 2,000-pound-rated elevator, this is not an act of faith, this is an act of foolishness. If you attempt to trim all rest, relaxation, and relationships out of your life so you can load it with more “good works,” you are similarly foolish.
Jesus modeled the need to step away from ministry, sometimes to pray, but other times to rest and be alone. Jesus modeled sleeping when you’re tired (Mark 4:38). Jesus modeled feasting (Matt 9:10). Jesus only had one instance of recorded ministry in the first 30 years of his life. He would have spent much of that time doing “unspiritual” carpentry. Are we prepared to condemn him for wasting time because he could have done more disciple-making than he did?
- People who cut out TV find many comparably “wasteful” ways to use their time
As a practical matter, as someone who grew up without a TV, I think that I was advantaged over kids who watched for hours a day. TV can certainly be watched in excess and often is. I don’t think I was advantaged vis-a-vis kids whose parents let them watch a limited amount of age-appropriate TV.
So, what did we do with the hours a day that not having a TV freed up? Some of it was spent reading, playing outdoors, playing board games, playing computer games, and listening to audio dramas. All of these are alternate forms of entertainment, which I never heard a sermon against. It’s unclear how the Holiness handbook could argue that watching a historical documentary is a waste of time, but reading a historical book is not. From a logical consistency perspective, either all entertainment is a waste, or it isn’t. It can’t be that an episode of Veggie Tales on a TV is a waste of time, but an episode of Adventures in Odyssey on cassette tape isn’t.
We also did not “redeem our time” to do any substantial amount of ministry beyond showing up at numerous church services. We spent a lot of time driving (often six hours a week) to the one church that was holy enough for us to attend, as well as much driving to anywhere else we wanted to go. We did that so we could own a 25-acre plot of land in the country, complete with a massive yard to mow. We spent a lot of time mowing and maintaining our land (probably another six hours a week in the summer). We didn’t do anything with the land; just mowed it repeatedly. Many other people I knew without TV were avid hunters who would spend days in the woods. Other than attending church, there was precious little ministry to the people God explicitly commanded us to serve. There is nothing of obvious eternal value accomplished by most of the activities we did in lieu of TV. Why didn’t anyone ever preach against these “wastes of time?”
Currently, I live in the suburbs of a small city, spend almost no time commuting anywhere, and have a TV that we bring up from our basement to watch the occasional show or movie from a streaming service (we typically subscribe to one at a time, with gaps in between). With my current life setup, my wife and I are engaged in an order of magnitude more ministry than my family was growing up. We put the “big rocks” of family and ministry first, and fill in the cracks with rest, relaxation, and entertainment.
In short, while I do agree that there are time savings to avoiding electronic media, entertainment in moderation is not a categorical waste of time. There are also plenty of things that waste your time that aren’t electronic entertainment. The most obvious one is owning things you don’t need that require a lot of work to afford and maintain.
To be clear, it is not to me to prescribe exactly how much hunting, lawn mowing, driving, reading, or YouTube watching is acceptable to God. I have no judgment for you if you do a lot of any of those things. Who am I to judge another man’s servant (Romans 14:4)? We are all stewards of our time and resources and should be focused on making the most use of ours rather than condemning others.
That said, I don’t think Jesus is unconcerned with how we entertain ourselves. My argument for uplifting entertainment is not an argument for a raunchy, hyper-sexualized comedy or a horror flick in which revenge by torture is glamorized.
It’s also not legalism to observe that much of the content created in the past couple of decades is optimized to undermine your Christian faith. Most people who design entertainment have a materialistic, atomistic, relativistic, and expressive individualistic worldview. They build shows to indulge your lust, stoke your greed, and stir your schadenfreude. Significant exposure can diminish your commitment to your faith—not through reasoned arguments, but through emotional manipulation. The creators of this content want you to adopt their worldview, which is what you expect from any creator.
Of course, these observations aren’t limited to movies or the internet. They are equally true of all forms of media and communication.
Discerning Wholesome Entertainment
Allow me to summarize a few observations that will let you know whether your entertainment is wholesome or not.
- Wholesome entertainment makes you more like Jesus.
As addressed above, rest and relaxation are gifts God gives us richly to enjoy. When consumed in healthy amounts, wholesome entertainment should make you feel refreshed and better able to engage with the stressors of life.
The content need not be explicitly Christian to accomplish this, any more than taking a walk needs to be explicitly Christian. If a good film stirs up your sense of wonder, creativity, humor, or justice, then it is making you more like Jesus, who embodied all of these traits.
- Wholesome entertainment strengthens your relationships.
Entertainment can provide us mere mortals with something light and pleasant to discuss, to rest from the heaviness of life under the sun. It can help spark a conversation with a stranger or unbeliever. In our hyper-polarized world, entertainment is still something that provides some unity across political party lines. A well-placed movie quote can inject levity into a tense conversation.
It can also provide an activity that gives people a reason to be together or interact remotely. I often played computer games with other people. Family movie night can be the highlight of a week for a kid. Entertainment can also give your two-year-old a break on a long car ride, which results in much less relational strain than perpetual crying would.
- Wholesome entertainment leaves time for more important things.
Entertainment is certainly not one of the most important things we do with our time, any more than sleep or eating are. We need to be deliberate about making time for direct investment in relationships (conversation), discipleship (mentoring and being mentored), service to others, and communion with God.
There are numerous important things that require more effort than watching a movie. There are lots of benefits to making time to read things in print, playing with your kids, exercising, and cooking healthy meals. Make commitments, habits, and routines around doing those things first.
The thing about electronic media is that it takes almost no effort to initiate, and it’s fascinating, so it tends to occupy more of our time than we intend it to (like scrolling through social media on your ever-present smartphone). I personally recommend that you create some barriers to electronic media to help maintain balance.
Here are some limits I use:
- When I was single, I only watched movies/TV with other people. I still do that now that I’m married, but it was even more restrictive when I lived alone.
- We have a family rule that we don’t use our smartphones at dinner.
- I currently put my phone away at 8 PM. I get it if I have a particular need for it, but I don’t keep it in my pocket, because that’s the time of day when I’m most prone to using it mindlessly.
- Our TV is in a closet. We get it out and plug it in when we want to watch something. That makes watching something a more deliberate act.
- If I’m watching a new movie, I look up parental guides on the Internet Movie Database (IMDB) or PluggedIn Online (by Focus on the Family) before I watch it. Every time.
- We’re very particular about what we would allow our kids to watch and restrictive on the time allotted.
My rules don’t need to be your rules, because I’m not you. That’s the beauty of freedom in Christ.
And whatever you decide to do, may you do it all to the glory of God.
—Nathan Mayo
Find this interesting? Check out our article, “Replacing Rules with Discipleship” For a full list of our articles tap here.