Originally Posted by AV1611

Some at the church I attend have been trying to organise a dance on the lines of this. I have spoken out against it and I was wondering what your thoughts were?

Standard Bearer - V.60 - I.2 - Strength of Youth - The Christian and Dancing (1) By Rev. Ronald L. Cammenga
Standard Bearer - V.60 - I.6 - Strength of Youth - The Christian and Dancing (2) By Rev. Ronald L. Cammenga

"1. Concerning "dancing" (or going to Balls), I only ask Christians to judge the amusement by its tendencies and accomplishments. To say there is anything morally wrong in the mere bodily act of dancing would be absurd. David danced before the ark. Solomon said, "There is a time to dance" (Ecclesiastes 3:4). Just as it is natural to lambs and kittens to frisk about, so it seems natural to young people, all over the world, to jump about to a lively tune of music. If dancing were taken up for mere exercise, if dancing took place at early hours, and men only danced with men, and women with women, it would be needless and absurd to object to it. But everybody knows that this is not what is meant by modern dancing (going to Balls and dances). This is an amusement which involves very late hours, extravagant dressing, and an immense amount of frivolity, vanity, jealousy, unhealthy excitement, and vain conversation. Who would like to be found in a modern dance-hall when the Lord Jesus Christ comes the second time? Who that has taken much part in balls and dancing, as I myself once did before I knew better, can deny that they have a most dissipating effect on the mind, like using drugs and the drinking of alcoholic beverages does on the body? I cannot withhold my opinion that dancing and the going to balls is one of those worldly amusements which "war against the soul," and which it is wisest and best to give up. And as for those parents who urge their sons and daughters, against their wills and inclinations, to go to balls and dances, I can only say that they are taking on themselves a most dangerous responsibility, and risking great injury to their children's souls." - J C Ryle

Originally Posted by VirginiaHuguenot

Ecclesiastes 3.1-4:

To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: and a time to dance;

Originally Posted by CarolinaCalvinist

Some like the electric slide. I feel like the only one I'm good at is the back slide.

Originally Posted by SRoper

Yes, mixed dancing is lawful. I think it would be fun to have folk dancing at my wedding reception should I marry.

Originally Posted by k.seymore

I think we need to read between the lines of Ryle's quotation in the opening post. What he is actually saying is nobody invited him to the prom. Or the ball, or whatever. And he is trying to convince himself that it doesn't matter, he doesn't like dancing anyway, or girls and their silly gossiping and frivolity and vanity. Poor guy. I can just picture him sitting outside the Gym in an ill-fitting suit plucking the petals of a corsage that he had bought... "just in case..."

Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie

I have heard it said that Oliver Cromwell danced at his daughter's wedding. Can anyone confirm that this is correct?

Originally Posted by k.seymore

I think we need to read between the lines of Ryle's quotation in the opening post. What he is actually saying is nobody invited him to the prom. Or the ball, or whatever. And he is trying to convince himself that it doesn't matter, he doesn't like dancing anyway, or girls and their silly gossiping and frivolity and vanity. Poor guy. I can just picture him sitting outside the Gym in an ill-fitting suit plucking the petals of a corsage that he had bought... "just in case..."

Originally Posted by py3ak

And not to be mean, or anything, or even to agree with Ryle, but if we are to read between the lines of his statement, why not read between the lines of this post? We could say something like "this reaction is sure proof that as a child the subject had secret, embarrassing impulses towards actively participating in big-band music which were severely repressed by an overbearing parent/guardian." It might be off the mark: but can we prove that it is more off the mark than the psychoanalysis of the good bishop?

Originally Posted by py3ak

Umm, not exactly. From Ryle: (emphasis added)

And not to be mean, or anything, or even to agree with Ryle, but if we are to read between the lines of his statement, why not read between the lines of this post? We could say something like "this reaction is sure proof that as a child the subject had secret, embarrassing impulses towards actively participating in big-band music which were severely repressed by an overbearing parent/guardian." It might be off the mark: but can we prove that it is more off the mark than the psychoanalysis of the good bishop?

Originally Posted by VirginiaHuguenot

Ecclesiastes 3.1-4:

To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;

Originally Posted by etexas

Actually he danced in Parliment.

Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie

There is a time to dance, therefore dancing (of some description) is lawful.

Readers may be interested to know that Ian Paisley's Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster requires ministers to swear, upon their ordination, that they "will oppose all dancing".

Originally Posted by k.seymore