SATAN'S SEAT

Belief in Satan as an actual being has fallen on hard times in our world. Millions of Americans believe they are too educated and too sophisticated to accept the Bible's teaching about Satan. They may not deny the existence of evil, but seem to believe there is no connection between a mythical being called "Satan" and evil. No true Bible believer can accept that position. The Son of God himself definitely accepted the reality of Satan. Jesus told the seventy who had returned from their mission: "I beheld Satan as lightening fall from heaven" (Lk. 10:18). If the Son of God accepted the reality of Satan, how can those who call themselves Christians deny his reality?

 

Please listen to what our Lord taught about Satan in his letters to the seven churches of Asia Minor. Christ told the Christians at Smyrna: "I know your works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but you are rich) and I know the blasphemy of those who say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan" (Rev. 2:9). Jesus said to the church at Pergamos: "I know your works, and where you dwell, even where Satan's seat is: and you hold fast my name, and have not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwells" (Rev. 2:13). Christ assured the church at Thyatira: "But unto you I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as many as have not this doctrine, and which have not known the depths of Satan, as they speak; I will put upon you no other burden" (Rev. 2:24). The Lord said to the dead church at Sardis: "Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews, but are not, but do lie: behold, I will make them to come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you" (Rev. 3:9).

 

Did you notice in my reading the expression, "Satan's seat" (Rev. 2:13)? The Greek word translated "seat" is thronos from which we derive our English word  "throne." The Greek word appears sixty-one times in the New Testament and is almost always translated "throne." In fact, the King James Version is the only version with which I am acquainted that uses the word "seat." The New King James Version transliterates the word "throne." My lesson today will be based on the topic, "Satan's Seat" or "Satan's Throne."

 

More than sixty year ago I purchased a little booklet with the title, Hell over Hollywood: The Truth about the Movies (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1942), by Dan Gilbert, Chairman of the Christian Newspaper Men's Committee to Investigate the Motion Picture Industry. A few brief excerpts from Dan Gilbert's small book will set the tone for our study today. He affirms: "This alien influence which the movies have enthroned over America has perverted the character of our people; it has dried up the sources of spiritual strength; it has plagued us with the pagan spirit of materialism and sexuality" (p. 13). "But Hollywood at work—or, perhaps we should say, the devil at work through Hollywood—presents a deliberate design to corrupt the morals of American youth" (p. 22). One final excerpt will have to suffice for today. "Hollywood debases, debauches, and defiles the characters and lives of those who are brought within reach of its contaminating power and propaganda" (p. 47).

 

These are very serious indictments of the movie industry. Do you think they were exaggerations of the moral and spiritual atmosphere in the 1940s? Dan Gilbert wrote his booklet more than sixty years ago. Is anyone so naive or blind that he thinks the situation has improved in the years that have intervened since the book was published? I do not know if Dan Gilbert is still alive, but if he were writing today, he might call his book Hell IN Hollywood rather than Hell over Hollywood. I am insisting that Hollywood is where Satan's seat is. O no, I am not inferring that Hollywood is the only place where Satan dwells. There are many other cities and countries where Satan dwells and rules. In fact, there are many human hearts where Satan reigns. Do you remember what the apostle Peter said to Ananias, the husband of Sapphira: "Why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit, and to keep back part of the price of the land" (Acts 5:3)?

 

Gene Wolfenbarger's book, When Hollywood Says Yes, How Can America Say No? (Green Forest, AR: New Leaf Press, 1997), quotes Dr. Tom Eliff, preacher for the First Southern Baptist Church of Del City, OK as saying: "It is no secret that Hollywood, more than any other city in our nation, is Satan's epicenter of moral debasement, constantly shaking and attempting to destroy the spiritual foundations upon which this nation was built" (p. 13). Wolfenbarger also quotes the famous filmmaker, George Lucas: "It's important that the people who make films have ethics classes, philosophy classes, and history classes. Otherwise, we're witch doctors" (p. 14). It needs to be said in passing that some ethics, philosophy and history classes might not make any substantial difference in what occurs in Hollywood. It would depend on who taught the classes and the philosophical foundations of those classes.

 

Frank Capra, one of the Hollywood's greatest movie directors, became disgusted with the moral trash being produced by the movie industry. At the age of sixty-four, he walked away because he could no longer support such blatant immorality. Wolfenbarger quotes Frank Capra as saying: "The hedonists.. .the hemophilic bleeding hearts, the God-haters, the quick-buck artists who substituted shock for talent, all cried: 'Shake 'em! Rattle 'em! God is dead" (p. 36). Frank Capra believed in emphasizing the positive qualities of his fellow human beings. You may remember that his movies included It's a Wonderful Life, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington and It Happened One Night.

 

Most Americans, especially our young people, tend to be hero worshippers. Our girls and boys choose sports figures or entertainment people for their heroes. What high school or college basketball player has not dreamed of becoming the next Michael Jordan or the next Larry Bird? Many of our girls want to look like Madonna or some other Hollywood actress. Are the Hollywood actors and actresses good role models for our young people? Do we want our children and young people to practice barnyard morality? Living together in Hollywood without being married is as common as breathing. When some of them marry, they pay little or no attention to their vows. They marry, divorce, remarry, divorce, remarry and divorce. Liz Taylor has been married eight times, not quite so many times as King Solomon, but she is headed in that direction.

 

When the handsome guys and beautiful girls lie around a swimming pool, they are about as naked as they can be without being arrested for indecent exposure. One preacher upset some people in a congregation when he said that some of our young women do not have on enough clothes to wad a shotgun. The church members accused the preacher of exaggerating. Maybe he was exaggerating if he were speaking of a .410 gauge shotgun, but not if he had in mind a 12-gauge shotgun. Of this we can be absolutely certain: the young men and women could never be accused of being modest.

 

In addition to their lewd dress, most of them are shown in the movies with a glass of strong drink in their hands. I wonder how many of our fine young people have begun to drink or have become alcoholics because they saw their heroes and heroines drinking in movies or on television. Those beautiful people seem to be having such a wonderful time. They appear to be the very epitome of success and happiness. Many of our young people may reason: If they can handle their drink, surely there must not be much wrong with drinking. Tragically, many of the Hollywood people destroy their abilities and even their lives with alcohol. And have you noticed how awful those entertainers look when the police arrest them for driving under the influence of alcohol? They may look beautiful on the screen or on the stage, but they look like losers in the police photographs. Glenn Campbell had the appearance of a down-and-out wino and so did some of the other popular entertainers and sports figures.

 

You probably have seen Michael Medved on television or heard him on his national talk show. He has appeared as a movie critic on "Nightline," "The Oprah Winfrey Show," "Good Morning America," "The Tonight Show," "Late Night with David Letterman" and Fox News Channel's program, "Hannity and Colmes." He is a devout Orthodox Jew. His book, Hollywood vs. America: Popular Culture and the War on Traditional Values (New York: HarperCollinsPublishers, 1996), is the most devastating critique of Hollywood I have ever read. Michael Medved's book asks: "Why does our popular culture seem so consistently hostile to the values that most Americans hold dear? Why does the entertainment industry attack religion, glorify brutality, undermine the family, and deride patriotism?" (Inside of the dust cover) I shall use the points in last question as an outline for our study today.

 

Does the entertainment industry, that is, movies and television, popular music, including some country music, actually attack religion? One would have had to have been asleep longer than Rip Van Winkle not to know that. I do not go to movies, but I enjoy watching movies in my den. Molly and I bought a number of musicals which we enjoyed watching together. I decided recently to go see the movie about Johnny Cash. I walked out about half through the movie. But I read about movies in books like the one Michael Medved wrote.

 

One chapter in Michael Medved's book has the title, "Comic Book Clergy" (pp. 50-69). Medved says Hollywood seems to go out its way to "affront the sensibilities of ordinary Americans." He expresses regret that there are no more "biblical blockbusters" like The Ten Commandments, The Robe and Ben Hur. Why do you suppose the movie industry does not produce more films like these? All of them were tremendously successful in the years of their release and the years that followed (pp. 50-51). Medved tells of Hollywood's advertising of the film, The Vision—a film about some conspiring Christians who develop a plot to take over the world. "THE THREAT: Right-wing evangelists with an arsenal of riches and a hunger for power. THE CONSPIRACY: To reach across Europe via satellite with the word of God. THE MISSION: To control your mind. WHEN THIS NETWORK GOES ON THE AIR, START PRAYING" (p. 56).

 

Many of the movies present religious leaders as if they are money-hungry, sexually promiscuous and living in the 18th century or earlier. Tragically, some of the television evangelists have furnished a solid basis for such portrayals. It would be difficult for Hollywood or any other entity to find preachers who are poorer models of what they ought to be than Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Bakker and Peter Popoff. But to use these three men as if they represent the thousands and thousands of preachers, priests or rabbis in our nation is dishonest. But the moguls in Hollywood would not intentionally misrepresent men who are religious leaders or would they? They not only would do so; they have deliberately done so for the past several years. There is hardly any doubt they get some kind of morbid satisfaction for portraying religious leaders as if they were Hollywood residents.

 

Do you have the slightest doubt that Hollywood glorifies brutality, as Michael Medved charges? Is it possible that Hollywood's addiction to brutality has a detrimental effect on the behavior of some of America's children and teenagers? Michael Medved quotes Daniel Linz, Professor of Psychology at the University of California, Santa Barbara: "The consensus among social scientists is that very definitely there's a causal connection between exposure to violence is the media and violent behavior" (p. 183). Two psychologists at the University of Illinois, Dr. Rowell Huesman and Dr. Leonard Eron, "found that those kids who watched significant amounts of TV violence at age eight were consistently more likely to commit violent crimes or engage in child or spouse abuse at age thirty. When publishing their findings in 1984, they wrote: 'We believe that heavy exposure to televised violence is one of the causes of aggressive behavior, crime and violence in society. Television violence affects youngsters of all ages, of both genders, at all socioeconomic levels and all levels of intelligence....It cannot be denied or explained away'" (p. 184).

 

Michael Medved says that Rambo III involved body counts of 264 and 106 killings (p. 185). The tragedy is that people who see violent movies or sexually promiscuous movies seem to demand more violent and more sordid movies. If they watch a movie with 100 killings, they lust for one that kills 200 or 300 people and kills them in more bizarre ways. According to Medved, Rob Bottin, the evil mind behind Total Recall and Robocop movies, told Entertainment Weekly: "Anything I make has to be something moviegoers haven't seen before. That means new tricks, which means more money, which means the audience is getting their—what is it now?—seven dollars worth. That's the thinking behind bigger and bigger and bigger. The question we always ask, 'How do we top ourselves'" (p. 187)?

 

The programs on MTV are often violent and sexually explicit. Michael Medved reports: "The National Coalition on Television Violence found that 68% of them (the programs on MTV) contained at least one of the following elements: explicit violence, suggestions of violence, sexually suggestive themes, profanity, smoking and/or alcohol consumption" (p. 193). Some of the police shows like Walker Texas Ranger kill more people in one hour than all the cops in the United States kill in a month or perhaps in a year. And besides, Walker Texas Ranger leans too much in the direction of the New Age movement.

 

Many movies not only are anti-Christian and pro-violence, they are also anti-family. Again I have not seen more than two or three movies in the past forty years. But I keep up with what is occurring by reading newspapers, books and other material about modern movies. Is there any doubt in your mind that Hollywood has been a negative influence on marriage and the family? How many movies and television programs actually support strong families? Do you believe the family is stronger today than it was before television came on the scene? Anyone who believes that television has strengthened marriage is either naive or blind or both.

 

Arnold Schwarzenegger appeared in the movie, Total Recall. He becomes disenchanted with his wife, played by Sharon Stone. She begs him to think of the sacred bond they had formed in their marriage. He says to his wife, "Consider that a divorce," and calmly shoots her through the forehead. Have you noticed on television that the couples who seem to have the best relationships are single people? Married people are seldom shown in a favorable light. But the facts are the exact opposite. Research has shown that married people have better intimate relationships than single people. Redbook magazine, a dedicated feminist publication, conducted a survey among 100,000 of its subscribers. The survey asked very personal questions. To the surprise of the editors of the magazine, they discovered that the more devoutly religious women were the better their sex lives were. To put it mildly, that was a shock to the publishers of Redbook.

 

There is so much more about Hollywood I would like to discuss with you if time permitted. But I want to close by referring to Kenneth Lloyd Billingsley's book, Hollywood Party: How Communism Seduced the American Film Industry in the 1930s and 1940s (Rocklin, CA: Forum, 1998). I can remember when Hollywood actors, directors and producers accused the United States government of conducting a witch hunt when many Hollywood people were accused of being Communists or Communist sympathizers. The sad fact is: It was not a witch hunt. Some of Hollywood's most influential peopled were Communists or Communist sympathizers. Billingsley quotes Paul Jarrico as saying, "There were Communists in Hollywood, and I was one of them" (p. 8). Billingsley describes some of the modern actors who are Communists. "Jane Fonda championed the North Vietnamese regime, Hollywood luminaries feted Nicaraguan Marxist Daniel Ortega, and actor Ed Asner openly raised money for Salvadoran Communist guerrillas, all without the slightest peril to their careers" (p. 282).

 

I have a question to close our study: Is there any doubt in your mind that Hollywood is "Satan's Seat" or at least, one of Satan's seats?

 

Winford Claiborne

The International Gospel Hour

P.O. Box 118

Fayetteville, TN 37334

Back to Home Page

Back to Transcripts Titles