a new gimmick reported by fox news

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Jailminister:
I somewhat agree. However, if a person dresses in a way to attract some one of the opposite sex, then they must share the blame also.

I agree to a point. But dressing attractively should not be automatically equated with dressing provocatively. One can affirm that a person is physically attractive without construing an intent to sexually attract the opposite sex.

For example, I've had women hit on me a few times in the grocery store when I'm wearing my gym workout clothes. (I'm no looker, but go figure!!!) Just a pair of black shorts, sleeveless black workout tee, and a "mighty ducks" baseball cap turned backwards. Should I stop wearing those clothes if someone find me attractive in them? They're not exactly revealing.

 

[Jailminister]

JohnV if you cause someone to lust after you, because of the way you are dressed, then you should not dress that way.

Why would you want to entice someone either purposely or unconciously if it could be avoided?

 

[massdak]

Originally posted by Johnv:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Jailminister:
I somewhat agree. However, if a person dresses in a way to attract some one of the opposite sex, then they must share the blame also.

I agree to a point. But dressing attractively should not be automatically equated with dressing provocatively. One can affirm that a person is physically attractive without construing an intent to sexually attract the opposite sex.

For example, I've had women hit on me a few times in the grocery store when I'm wearing my gym workout clothes. (I'm no looker, but go figure!!!) Just a pair of black shorts, sleeveless black workout tee, and a "mighty ducks" baseball cap turned backwards. Should I stop wearing those clothes if someone find me attractive in them? They're not exactly revealing. </font>[/QUOTE]you may have misconstrued it as hitting on you.
it probably was more of a patronizing gesture.

 

[dianetavegia]

Unfortunately, Jailminister, some people have such filthy minds that it wouldn't matter if Johnv were in a baggy outfit and unkempt... Oh wait a minute, that's how all those 'movie stars' dress now isn't it?

 

[KenH]

I wonder if all women wore burqas would there be no lust?

 

[massdak]

Originally posted by KenH:
I wonder if all women wore burqas would there be no lust?

what is a burgas?
it would help if women wore clothes that hid all there feminine quality's, it sure would help those that are weak.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by massdak:
it would help if women wore clothes that hid all there feminine quality's, it sure would help those that are weak.

As I understand it that's pretty much what a burqas does in the Islamic world.

Personally, I am not in favor of that. Neither am I in favor of women going around absolutely nude. But neither do I think all dresses and skirts have to be below the knees, nor do I think that no bare arms can be shown. About the only thing I don't like within reason is the midriff being shown but maybe that's because I grew up seeing girls in miniskirts in the 1960s but not seeing their belly button.

 

[Dr. Bob]

A burkha (var. spellings) is a head-to-toes robe worn by Fundamentalism Moslem women in Afghanistan.

The right to bare arms is guaranteed in the second Amendment, btw.

If a woman compliments me on my suit or appearance, I do not assume that she is hitting on me or my appearance is causing her to lust. The opposite, however, may not be so innocent. I know how men think.

 

[JonathanDT]

As an 18 year old guy, I didn't even notice her dress. IMO it is perfectly modest, though I did notice she's pretty. And if it gets one person to read the Bible a little, well God bless it!!

Will someone read the Bible more because of a pretty cover? I don't really know, but what I do know is that if I'm browsing through a library deciding what to read, I never pick a book with an ugly cover. Maybe it's just being a teenager, but I'll notice that book with the cool looking cover and be much more interested in reading it then in that book with a plain red cover and the letters printed in gold.

 

[dianetavegia]

Jonathan, I noticed how happy the girls looked and the big smiles. I thought that would be an encouragement. I didn't notice the 'clothes' until one of the posters pointed it out and I'm a 52 year old grandmother.

Diane

 

[Clint Kritzer]

I couldn't care less about the girl's shirt, though I am not surprised at the reaction by some on the board. It is something that the publisher should have considered and something to which someone who carries the publication should be sesitive. Romans 15:1-2 comes to mind.

I do, however, feel that the cover lacks a certain dignity that it is befitting sacred texts. It's kind of like a church with a neon sign on its roof. It somehow just seems "wrong" to me.

I remember when I was a kid, "Good News for Modern Man" employed a similar strategy of changing the cover to a collage of Newspaper headings with a bold, red type for a title.

Did this approach work for them? I seem to remember everyone having a copy, but I don't know if it really increased reading.

 

[Dallasdid]

If this Revolve NT came in King James it would be different. it would have had 3 90 yr old ladies in dresses from shoulder to toes and have articles like "how to live long lives" "how to stay beautiful"

 

[Dallasdid]

"Well I think because it does not have sleeves it is inmodest" "I think cause it looks like an under garment it is wrong" how silly will some of you get. There is nothing imodest about the shirt she is wearing. It does not show any thing but her arms oh my word !!!! her arms man i dont know if i will be able to with stand the lusting over her {snip} arms!!! lol {snip} some times a lot of us can be so rediclous over the smallest stuff. When is the last time you tried to reach out to teens its easy to critisize every thing and do nothing why not try doing something.

[edited to remove inflammatory remarks]

[ September 06, 2003, 09:57 PM: Message edited by: Clint Kritzer ]

 

[Dallasdid]

I just read through all the replies alot of you people are so funny you have to laugh. The girl is waering a shirt that only revelas the arms and top shoulders and we sit here and go "how ungodly" yadda yadda yadda we try to make our rules to be like it is what God wants. I dont recall any where in the Bible it says thou shalt have skirts below the knees, are thou shalt wear shirts that cover your arms. But some baptist on this board would think it is there. If you dont have Bible for it then dont try to make it look like it came from the Bible. Modesty is taught from Bible but no where is it in the man made rules that some of us have listed. This is for girls only its not a guys Bible the girls could be wearing eskimo outfits and some one would still try to find something wrong with it and guys would still lust hello if some one is going to lust it aint matter (southern slang) what they a wearing. Lets be mature Christians not foolish

 

[All about Grace]

Originally posted by Dallasdid:
I just read through all the replies alot of you people are so funny you have to laugh. The girl is waering a shirt that only revelas the arms and top shoulders and we sit here and go "how ungodly" yadda yadda yadda we try to make our rules to be like it is what God wants. I dont recall any where in the Bible it says thou shalt have skirts below the knees, are thou shalt wear shirts that cover your arms. But some baptist on this board would think it is there. If you dont have Bible for it then dont try to make it look like it came from the Bible. Modesty is taught from Bible but no where is it in the man made rules that some of us have listed. This is for girls only its not a guys Bible the girls could be wearing eskimo outfits and some one would still try to find something wrong with it and guys would still lust hello if some one is going to lust it aint matter (southern slang) what they a wearing. Lets be mature Christians not foolish

Welcome to the Baptist Board where legalism often surfaces in the guise of "holiness".