The Bible teaches that certain dances are sinful.

Below are the points Con has made in his last post: 1. Pro (myself) “is living in a world of Happy Feet.”2. Pro (myself) legalistically believes that Christians are under the Old Testament, which has been made obsolete by Jesus’ death on the cross.3. The Argentine tango is not wrong but merely an expression of love.4. Caramelldansen is not wrong but involves just happiness and silliness from Japanese anime characters.5. The bump is “not lewdness, although you can injure your friend or yourself by performing this dance.”6. Pro (myself) quotes from verses 3–5 of 1st Peter, which shows that “he's going to give himself an account to God.”7. “Judge not that ye be not judged.” However, we do need to judge things like “drugs, alcohol or marriage.”8. “Christians are not perfect as non-Christians are according to Romans.” If I have left out any points of yours, Con, please notify me in the next post. Pro (myself) “is living in a world of Happy Feet.” Maybe, maybe not. If the proposition were, “Happy Feet teaches that certain dances are sinful,” then you’d have a good point showing the proposition to be false, assuming “Dancing is good” to be a moral of its story. But the proposition is, “The Bible teaches that certain dances are sinful.” And not only did Con get the subject (Happy Feet vs. the Bible) wrong, but even the object is outside the scope of the debate. This debate is over whether “certain dances [i.e., the Argentine Tango, Caramelldansen, belly dancing, the bump, and booty dancing] are sinful.” None of the dances in this debate are endorsed by or performed in Happy Feet; rather, tap dancing (which neither I nor Con believe to be wrong) is what’s done. However, I doubt this was really intended to be a serious point of Con's.I do find it interesting that Con sourced Ephesians 5:19 to show singing authorized but did not source any verses for dancing. Pro (myself) legalistically believes that Christians are under the Old Testament, which has been made obsolete by Jesus’ death on the cross. You did not give a Scripture to convince me otherwise. However, I will do it for you: And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, having wiped out the handwriting of requirements [i.e., the Old Testament] that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. … So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ. —Colossians 2:13–17 I don’t understand what made you think I believed the Old Testament was binding on people living today. You also said this in the “Comments” section, where you assumed that I was “a Church of Christ minister.” Whether I am or not, I have never heard “a Church of Christ minister” say that we today are under the Old Testament. However, as a balance, we should also consider that “whatever things were written before [i.e., in the Old Testament] were written for our learning, that we through the patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope” (Rom. 15:4). Another thing in which the Old Testament can be used “for our learning” is that we through the standards given in the Book of Genesis (e.g., Adam and Eve, still unclothed despite their “coverings,” being given tunics that went from the shoulders down to the knees) may have the knowledge of what is inappropriate and what is not. After all, the sex appeal of this region of the body hasn’t changed significantly since the writing of the Old Testament,[1] and Jesus’ standard for lust hasn’t become any less strict: “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matt. 5:27–28). The Argentine tango is not wrong but merely an expression of love. Mere assertions will not convince anyone in a debate; you need to explain why this is the case. You did not attempt to debunk what I have said. When T. A. Faulkner realized “the iniquity and the enormity of the hideous business” which he “had been following for years”—talking about things such as the waltz!—even he knew he had to stop, forsaking his entire career.[2] “The dance is indulged in by many of our so-called ‘first families,’ and yet, it is one of the most dangerous of social pleasures because of the fact that it arouses, to an alarming degree, the demons of lust with which humanity is inoculated.”[3] If it happens with the waltz, it happens with the seductive[7] Argentine tango. If not, explain why not. Caramelldansen is not wrong but involves just happiness and silliness from Japanese anime characters. You do not appear to have considered what I have said. Not only does this dance involve the flaunting of the hips, but the rabbit ears are also to be taken in consideration. This anime is not Pokémon, by any means. It is an adult visual novel.[4] If you still don’t get the rabbit ears, rabbits are known for multiplying and have thus become a symbol of sexual reproduction.[5][6] The bump is “not lewdness, although you can injure your friend or yourself by performing this dance.” Again, mere assertions will not work. Explain why this is the case, using references. Even by the definition given, “bumping hip to backside” is “intimate”—not referring to being “friendly,” of course, but to being lustful—lewd. Is this not the case? Pro (myself) quotes from verses 3–5 of 1st Peter, which shows that “he's going to give himself an account to God.” No, it refers to worldly people who “run … in the … flood of dissipation, speaking evil of” those who do not, such as by calling them out of touch or legalists. “Judge not that ye be not judged.” However, we do need to judge things like “drugs, alcohol or marriage.” Similar to what you said, we are to “judge with righteous judgment” (John 7:24). But you must show that judging these dances is not “righteous judgement” for your point to be valid. Interestingly enough, modern dancing (e.g., the Argentine Tango) can seduce people[7] into committing adultery (violating marriage) and typically can involve wine (alcohol). “Christians are not perfect as non-Christians are according to Romans.” No one’s perfect, I agree. But are you saying that this means we all can just sin? “Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?” (Romans 6:2). And now I’ll turn the debate back to you, Con. Extrabiblical references [1] Note 4 from my last argument [2] Note 5 from my last argument [3] https://play.google.com... [4] http://knowyourmeme.com...[5] http://emojipedia.org... [6] http://www.famouslogos.us... [7] http://interviewwithhelaine.blogspot.com...