Browse By Topic
Entertainment
The case against MMA, boxing, gladiatorial combat, cockfighting, bullbaiting and other blood sports
Violence might sometimes be necessary, but it should never be amusing
*****
Under what circumstances are Christians permitted, in good conscience, to view adults deliberately inflicting violence on one another for the purposes of entertainment?
This may seem like a strange question, but it isn’t. On social media, Christians regularly post commentary on the latest UFC match – most recently, several prominent accounts posted minute-by-minute updates on the fight between veteran boxer Mike Tyson and Jake Paul. The sight of two adult men inflicting violence on one another for the entertainment of others was enormously popular, which is why Tyson was paid a staggering $20 million, and Paul was paid $40 million.
I’ve been thinking quite a bit about this issue recently. Last year, I was invited to participate in a long-form discussion on a range of cultural issues with Catholic podcaster Matt Fradd on his podcast Pints with Aquinas. One of the topics that came up was the acceptability for Christians of viewing violence – and combat sports – as entertainment. We both agreed that we found combat sports fascinating, and that we were attracted to them as feats of strength and skill. Yet, we both concluded that watching violence as entertainment should be avoided.
Now, I am aware – after years writing on cultural issues – that nothing attracts a backlash like criticizing someone’s preferred entertainment. Tim Challies has observed the same trend, and I think the fierceness with which people defend their entertainment is evidence of how central it has become in so many of our lives. But when considered objectively, it is not difficult to conclude that inherently violent combat sports such as Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) are inappropriate entertainment for Christians.
Entertained by what we shouldn’t do?
Biblically, we are forbidden to do violence to others and to harm our own bodies outside of specifically justified circumstances, which would include a just war or law enforcement. I want to make clear that I am not making the case against learning or practicing skills such as boxing, mixed martial arts, or other forms of fighting and self-defence. My argument is that violence should not be entertainment, which is defined as “the action of providing or being provided with amusement or enjoyment.” I would apply a similar standard to films that glorify violence, which is distinct from depicting violence. A film about war or genocide that portrays reality would not, I hope we can agree, be “entertaining” as such.
There is a distinction between learning to inflict violence in the context of a legitimate vocation (like soldier or police officer) or learning how to do so in self-defence, and watching violence to amuse ourselves. The early Christians were universal in their condemnation of gladiatorial combat, and the difference between gladiatorial battles and UFC fights is one of degree, not kind. We know what the physical effects of combat sports such as UFC and boxing are, and we cannot pretend that the fighters are not doing permanent damage to themselves and others. Violence is inherent to these sports, as the intent is to win by inflicting physical violence on the opponent until he or she is knocked out or submits.
The research into the physical damage that fighters inflict on one another is extensive and conclusive. From that perspective, I suspect that we may one day come to see violence in sport the way we now view bullbaiting or cockfighting. Young men should not be sacrificing their bodies and their cognitive abilities for the entertainment of the masses. While it is true that other sports can also result in physical harm – hockey, basketball – violence is an aberration rather than an intrinsic part of these sports. Those who make this point are making a category error.
For those who think violence as entertainment is acceptable, I would be interested in hearing their answer to this question: How is sport and entertainment a justifiable exception to the general Christian prohibition on violence?
Two defences
In order to claim that combat sports such as UFC are justifiable entertainment for Christians, you must defend this thesis: Human beings are morally permitted to inflict violence on one another for money and the entertainment of others. I have yet to see this thesis convincingly defended. In most discussions I have had on this subject, people are remarkably unwilling to apply Christian standards to entertainment combat fighting. Instead, one of two responses is usually offered: “You’re being legalistic” or “I really enjoy watching fights.” The first response is the lazy Christian’s preferred defence of many indefensible things (and misunderstands the term “legalistic” to boot); the second is irrelevant.
Many violent combat sports – especially UFC – bring out profoundly unhealthy and unchristian attitudes in the spectators. The bursts of particularly savage violence are not incidental – they are a key reason many enjoy these sports so much. The sight of two men attacking one another and physically damaging one another sends crowds into a frenzy that in many instances can accurately be described as bloodlust.
Skilled yes, but brutal still
Many fans rightly note that professional fighters display enormous skill, and that fights resemble a game of enormous chess. But surely we can agree that the atmosphere at the fights as well as the attitude towards physical violence being cultivated by the spectator are profoundly unedifying.
In short, I believe UFC is to human relations what pornography is to sex. Some lusts should not be stoked. Some things should not be entertaining.
News
Saturday Selections – Nov. 30, 2024
What actually is fire? (8 min)
In a "don't try this at home" spectacular, a BBC hosts tries to figure out what actually makes up fire. And the wonder of it is, there's kind of nothing to it. It's another marvel that God created for us to investigate – slack-jawed, we discover that the closer we gaze, the more wonder there is to find.
How could 10,000 dinosaurs end up in just 1 meter of mud?
"There is a layer of mudstone that is 1 meter (3 feet) thick and it stretches for 80-acres. That’s really shallow and really wide. But it’s filled with over a million bones. The big bones are at the bottom and the little bones are at the top, having been 'graded' through a gravity-sorting process."
How to get things done: deal with interruptions
Appreciated this – I'd never really thought through how the way I deal with interruptions had theological implications.
Can Satan perform miracles?
What Pharaoh's magicians pulled off in Exodus 7–8 has always had me wondering about the limits on what Satan can do. Clearly, his magicians couldn't do everything Moses and Aaron were enabled by God to do... but they did seem to be able to "create," at least in a sense. So can Satan do miracles? This gent makes a good case to think not.
The case for and against visual depictions of Jesus
Are images of Jesus violations of the Second Commandment?
On top of the cases for and against detailed in the articles above, I'm going to add an additional thought: if you don't know one way or the other, you shouldn't do it. If something might be sinful, and not doing it is fine, then why would you risk doing what's sinful? Jay Adams explains that thought further in his article "What To Do When You Don't Know What To Do."
Keith Green rebuts the other world religions in 1 minute
He cuts right to the core.
Today's Devotional
December 2 - The harvest of the earth
“So He who sat on the cloud swung his sickle across the earth and the earth was reaped.” - Revelation 14:16
Scripture reading: Revelation 14:14-20
The last picture in Revelation 14 is of the final judgment described as a harvest with two parts, a general harvest and a harvest of grapes, or the wicked. Notice that it is Jesus Who brings in the harvest, >
Today's Manna Podcast
Blessed are the pure in heart: The Beatitudes
Serving #679 of Manna, prepared by Raymond Sikkema, is called "Blessed are the pure in heart" (The Beatitudes) and is based on Matthew 5.
