Dance. In the widest use of the word, a springing or leaping in evidence of great emotion, as of joy or elation; or symbolic of stern determination, as in certain war-dances. It is in this sense that the word is used in the Bible of women and of children who leaped in joyful steps. Judg. 11:34; 21:21. 23; Job 21:11; Matt. 11:17. It is in this meaning, also, that we are told that there is a time to dance, Eccl. 3:4, that is a time for showing one's joy in measured steps expressive of the inward elation The Bible also speaks of a formal dancing before the Lord, in token of a religious fervor and ecstasy, the rhythmic movements being made in honor of Jehovah. 2 Sam. 6:14. On the other hand, Holy Scripture tells about a most improper, highly suggestive, and lascivious dance, namely, that which was danced by the daughter of Herodias when she, after the manner of the Oriental dancing girls, whirled before the assembled guests of King Herod, so inflaming their passions and delighting the king that he made a rash promise, which resulted in the death of the faithful witness John the Baptist. Mark 6:22. A dance such as this, even though performed by an individual person, man or woman, with any suggestiveness due to scanty or improper clothing or any indecency of posture or gesture, is clearly to be condemned.—In order to have the proper conception of dancing, as indulged in by a number of people, either of one sex alone or of both sexes together, we must distinguish very carefully. One can very well conceive of certain rhythmical movements, as in some folk-dances, where the element of the impure and indecent is in itself not present, where no improprieties are included in the dance. The May-day ceremony of many schools, with its May-pole dance in various intricate figures, belongs to this class, especially if there are only girls in decent garments included in the movements. Thus it may also be said of many of the old-fashioned square dances, in which only rhythmic movements were the object and any improper advances were excluded from the outset, that the stately marching and doubling was in itself not to be condemned.—But the matter is different when we take the modern dance into consideration, the dance as it is now universally known and practised, not only in ball-rooms of a more or less public nature, but also in private homes and clubs of various kinds. It is not the public or private nature of the affair which is our chief consideration here, but the essential feature of the act, the embrace, which forms the basis of modern dancing. Whenever a. man places his arm about a woman in a more or less close embrace, whether this be done upon the occasion of auto or buggy rides, on boat trips, in parks, in the parlor, in public or in private, he is indulging in a familiarity which is not permissible outside the boundaries of holy wedlock (which includes the status of a valid betrothal) and close relationship. The embracing of the bosom of a stranger, one with whom a man is not united in an estate sanctioned by God Himself, is an act impure in itself, Prov. 5:20, and cannot be indulged in by consistent Christians without serious injury to their consciences and probable lasting harm to their souls. To this must be added the fact that the ultramodern dances, from the waltz, down to the latest jungle movement, add to the embrace gestures and acts of indecency which tend to inflame the passions. Moreover, the music which has been invented to accompany the modern dances is of a nature to stir up the passions to the highest pitch. And finally, those who indulge in modern dances are continually giving offense, not only to such as witness their shameless behavior in itself, but also to their partners in the dance, who are ever in danger of becoming heated in their lusts and to sin in desires and thoughts, if not in glances, words, and deeds. Christians will always heed the warning words of the apostle: "Flee also youthful lusts." 2 Tim. 2:22.