Kanye West

[seanD]

In a way, that's an argument from silence, but not terribly unreasonable. That Paul goes on and pretty much compares the Christian life to the games adds something, also.

Well, I was actually wrong about the ECFs. It seems Tertullian was against the games, but I'm wondering, since the first century Christians said nothing about it, if the sentiment changed towards the latter half of the century because the games were including Christians as the victims?

Nonetheless, KG's argument is still flawed because his premise about "loving one's brother" as a polemic against contact sports was wrong.

[NorrinRadd]

Well, I was actually wrong about the ECFs. It seems Tertullian was against the games, but I'm wondering, since the first century Christians said nothing about it, if the sentiment changed towards the latter half of the century because the games were including Christians as the victims?

Nonetheless, KG's argument is still flawed because his premise about "loving one's brother" as a polemic against contact sports was wrong.

I think you misread his post w.r.t. "contact" sports.

[rogue06]

I'm of the belief that even the gladiator games that fought to the death weren't sin, as long as the participants weren't forced into doing it against their will, and if that was the case, then the sin falls on those doing the forcing, not the participants. But for someone to say that modern contact sports is sin is pretty absurd, and quite judgemental against the myriad number of Christians that participate in contact sports.

Since nearly all gladiators were slaves it wasn't voluntary.

It should be noted that gladiators rarely ever fought to the death. They were very expensive and nobody wanted their property butchered needlessly. What the people in the stands wanted to see was a good fight. If the loser fought well they were almost always spared to fight again. The gladiators were also skilled at inflicting nonlethal wounds and those who would wantonly kill their opponents usually ended up dead at the hands of the other gladiators.

Still, when you're fighting with deadly weapons folks can and did end up dead.

Last thing of note, while slaves, the gladiators often lived better than 90% of free men. They were wined and dined and offered their choice of female slaves for "companionship." Many made enough money to buy their freedom although some while now free continued to fight.


ETA: One notable exception were the mass fights where hundreds would fight and only a few would survive. FWIU these rarely used trained gladiators though.

[rogue06]

I don't see how one can reconcile a Christian ethic of loving one's brother with a sport where the goal is to intentionally inflict pain and suffering (I would differentiate this with other sports like basketball or football where injuries can happen but the goal is not to intentionally maim). The early Christian fathers were vehemently against the gladiatorial games for that reason. Paul using boxing as an analogy does not mean that he actually endorsed the activity.

What about hockey, a sport where the joke has long been about going to go see a fight the other day and a hockey game broke out.

[rogue06]

From what I understand the ECFs were against the gladiator games because of the pagan spectacle surrounding it. Nonetheless, neither Jesus nor any of the apostles said anything about it, and you'd certainly think they would have addressed whether or not Christians should partake in it if it was that much of a sin to do so.

Josephus made it clear that the Jews were united in their opposition to gladiatorial games when Herod sponsored them in Judea.

“He had also made a great preparation of wild beasts, and of lions themselves in great abundance, and of such other beasts as were either of uncommon strength, or of such a sort as were rarely seen. These were prepared either to fight with one another, or that men who were condemned to death were to fight with them. And truly foreigners were greatly surprised and delighted at the vastness of the expenses here exhibited, and at the great dangers that were here seen; but to natural Jews, this was no better than a dissolution of those customs for which they had so great a veneration. It appeared also no better than an instance of barefaced impiety, to throw men to wild beasts, for the affording delight to the spectators; and it appeared an instance of no less impiety, to change their own laws for such foreign exercises.”

The Jerusalem Talmud explicitly forbids attendance at gladiatorial matches, and refers to those who attend them as being an accessory to murder because their attendance endorses the event: "One who sits in a stadium is a shedder of blood."

This might well be something so universally condemned that it wasn't felt necessary to jump aboard the band wagon or if it was condemned, not considered important enough to mention.

[Cow Poke]

What about hockey, a sport where the joke has long been about going to go see a fight the other day and a hockey game broke out.

I've always been amazed that boxing exists in civil society - when the main objective is to knock the other guy senseless.

It's one thing to be accidentally hit by a baseball, or knocked out in a collision in football where somebody's trying to move the ball to the goal.... but boxing is all about doing the human damage.

[seanD]

I think you misread his post w.r.t. "contact" sports.

I don't see how I did that:

"I don't see how one can reconcile a Christian ethic of loving one's brother with a sport where the goal is to intentionally inflict pain and suffering (I would differentiate this with other sports like basketball or football where injuries can happen but the goal is not to intentionally maim)."

He's wrong to apply that principle to contact sports. Not only because it's hypocritical for him to do so, since none of us follow that policy (i.e. "loving your borther," "turning the other cheek," et al.), but because it's a false premise. "Loving your brother" and competing against him in a physical sporting event is not mutually exclusive, as evidence by the camaraderie most of them share with each other after the event.
.

[seanD]

Josephus made it clear that the Jews were united in their opposition to gladiatorial games when Herod sponsored them in Judea.

“He had also made a great preparation of wild beasts, and of lions themselves in great abundance, and of such other beasts as were either of uncommon strength, or of such a sort as were rarely seen. These were prepared either to fight with one another, or that men who were condemned to death were to fight with them. And truly foreigners were greatly surprised and delighted at the vastness of the expenses here exhibited, and at the great dangers that were here seen; but to natural Jews, this was no better than a dissolution of those customs for which they had so great a veneration. It appeared also no better than an instance of barefaced impiety, to throw men to wild beasts, for the affording delight to the spectators; and it appeared an instance of no less impiety, to change their own laws for such foreign exercises.”

The Jerusalem Talmud explicitly forbids attendance at gladiatorial matches, and refers to those who attend them as being an accessory to murder because their attendance endorses the event: "One who sits in a stadium is a shedder of blood."

This might well be something so universally condemned that it wasn't felt necessary to jump aboard the band wagon or if it was condemned, not considered important enough to mention.

Just because that was the sentiment among the Jews doesn't mean that was the sentiment among the Gentiles. Most of the letters in the New Testament were written to Gentile churches, and as we all know, there was a number of issues, including issues of conduct among the Gentiles that was addressed. Attending gladiator games wasn't one of them. It would be stretch to assume none of the Gentiles that converted ever attended a game or wondered if attending a game after conversion was appropriate. Most Christians today wouldn't think a contact sport was that big a deal to address, and that's what I imagine Christians back then thought about the games.

[KingsGambit]

I don't see how I did that:

"I don't see how one can reconcile a Christian ethic of loving one's brother with a sport where the goal is to intentionally inflict pain and suffering (I would differentiate this with other sports like basketball or football where injuries can happen but the goal is not to intentionally maim)."

He's wrong to apply that principle to contact sports. Not only because it's hypocritical for him to do so, since none of us follow that policy (i.e. "loving your borther," "turning the other cheek," et al.), but because it's a false premise. "Loving your brother" and competing against him in a physical sporting event is not mutually exclusive, as evidence by the camaraderie most of them share with each other after the event.
.

I think you're misunderstanding my argument. My issue isn't with contact sports, but with specific combat sports, such as boxing, where you're trying to knock the person out. Physical contact can occur in other sports as well, but in those sports, trying to injure is not the whole point of the game. (So something like wrestling, where you're trying to pin the person but not with the goal of trying to induce unconsciousness, would be fine.)

[seanD]

I think you're misunderstanding my argument. My issue isn't with contact sports, but with specific combat sports, such as boxing, where you're trying to knock the person out. Physical contact can occur in other sports as well, but in those sports, trying to injure is not the whole point of the game. (So something like wrestling, where you're trying to pin the person but not with the goal of trying to induce unconsciousness, would be fine.)

You're doing much more in "combat" sports than trying to knock your opponent out, especially MMA. Nonetheless, that's your opinion, which is fine, just don't try and make it a religious issue because you have no scriptural position to do so.

[NorrinRadd]

I've always been amazed that boxing exists in civil society - when the main objective is to knock the other guy senseless.

It's one thing to be accidentally hit by a baseball, or knocked out in a collision in football where somebody's trying to move the ball to the goal.... but boxing is all about doing the human damage.

Yeah. I won't watch that stuff -- and I'll watch dang near ANYTHING.

Grappling sports are another matter entirely. I really enjoy watching them, even though I'm clueless.

[rogue06]

Just because that was the sentiment among the Jews doesn't mean that was the sentiment among the Gentiles. Most of the letters in the New Testament were written to Gentile churches, and as we all know, there was a number of issues, including issues of conduct among the Gentiles that was addressed. Attending gladiator games wasn't one of them. It would be stretch to assume none of the Gentiles that converted ever attended a game or wondered if attending a game after conversion was appropriate. Most Christians today wouldn't think a contact sport was that big a deal to address, and that's what I imagine Christians back then thought about the games.

I thought this was about how Jesus and the Apostles viewed blood sports, not how Gentile converts did. In fact, you even made that distinction when, after noting the ECF's opposition, you wrote

Nonetheless, neither Jesus nor any of the apostles said anything about it

[KingsGambit]

You're doing much more in "combat" sports than trying to knock your opponent out, especially MMA. Nonetheless, that's your opinion, which is fine, just don't try and make it a religious issue because you have no scriptural position to do so.

The Bible doesn't say anything about pornography either. All we have are principles. It's fair to try to extrapolate those principles and see how they apply.

[Cow Poke]

Yeah. I won't watch that stuff -- and I'll watch dang near ANYTHING.

Grappling sports are another matter entirely. I really enjoy watching them, even though I'm clueless.

I was a wrestler in High School - loved it. Did quite well in it.

[Cow Poke]

The Bible doesn't say anything about pornography either. All we have are principles. It's fair to try to extrapolate those principles and see how they apply.

But Jesus was pretty specific about looking at a woman with lust, so...