Bible Modesty - Part 1

[Rufus_1611]

Pardon me Herb, but the language you use here is as sexually provocative as the attire about which you are complaining. Reading this sentence took my mind places that it should not go. It makes me wonder what you spend your time thinking about.

Hmmm...could of used some of this moral outrage in the oral sex thread. The only one of those words that are not in the Bible is "crotch". Does the Bible take your mind into places that it should not go?

 

[saturneptune]

Hmmm...could of used some of this moral outrage in the oral sex thread. The only one of those words that are not in the Bible is "crotch". Does the Bible take your mind into places that it should not go?

Moral outrage comes from the Holy Spirit guiding the Christian, not legalism or a lack of common sense.

 

[Rufus_1611]

Now there are times when I am downtown and I can't tell if someone is a guy or a gal! That bothers me ... but these characters are so scruffy that I doubt they would tempt anyone sexually!

This issue is as much about gender confusion as sexual provocation. In God's model He ascribes certain roles and characteristics to men and certain roles and characteristics to women. When these genders adorn themselves in the garments of the opposing gender it causes confusion of identity and confusion of roles. Then you have women working rather than being keepers of the home. You have men giving up their role as spiritual and physical leaders of the home. You have children growing up unsure of what the differences are between a man and a woman. And you have a "what's the big deal" attitude when those children grow up to "love" people of their own gender.

 

[J. Jump]

A Christian's present condition has to do with the finished work of Christ on the cross. It also has to do with grace, and the guidance of the Holy Spirit in our lives. It has nothing to do with being weighted down by meaningless legalism.

So being holy as He is Holy is legalistic huh? Following Christ's commandments are legalistic huh?

Like I said in my post Helen's statement accurately reflects modern-day Christendom. Live and let live for tomorrow we die and we each get our piece of paradise pie. Mine may be smaller than yours, but oh well it's paradise pie, so who cares.

And I didn't have to do anything different to get my piece. Just live like the world and enjoy all the fruits thereof and then paradise pie when I die. It's not wonder Christendom is so jacked up these days

A Christian's present condition has to do with the finished work of Christ on the cross.

That's just the starting point. There's more to the Christian life than eternal salvation. It's great when someone gets saved, but we've got to start allowing the Holy Spirit to guide us as you suggest. And if we don't (ie who cares about the present condition, I know I have been contaminated by the world and Christ says He needs to wash me, but Who is He to suggest such a thing) there are problems in the present, and will be problems in the future unless it is taken care of.

 

[Amy.G]

Any clothing that accents or emphasizes or exposes the woman's buttocks, breasts, crotch, or delicately formed thighs (Isa. 20:4; 47:3,4) is not only immodest but is downright sexually provocative to the lusts of sinful men.

I'd like to know where I can get some of those delicately formed thighs!:laugh: :laugh:

 

[annsni]

I'd like to know where I can get some of those delicately formed thighs!:laugh: :laugh:

Hey, me too!!

 

[Rufus_1611]

Incredible that anyone would think that a woman wearing slacks is trying to dress like a man... Also incredible that the thought of women in slacks automatically sends some men into a sexual frenzy....I believe that speaks more of the man's heart condition than anything the woman is doing.

The biblical instruction is modesty...There are certainly modest women's slacks, thus this remains a non issue except in the mind of the legalist.

Bro Tony

For greater than 200+ years the predominant values of the American culture were that women were to be adorned in dresses and men in pants. In the last 3-4 decades ladies have gone to wearing the garments of men and now the beliefs of the remnant that defends the old paths is considered to have incredible thoughts.

 

[Rufus_1611]

A Christian's present condition has to do with the finished work of Christ on the cross. It also has to do with grace, and the guidance of the Holy Spirit in our lives. It has nothing to do with being weighted down by meaningless legalism.

Should we then sin to avoid legalism? Where is your line of what are the really important sins to avoid and what is considered legalism?

 

[Amy.G]

Who wore pants in the OT?

 

[rbell]

Quote:
Originally Posted by rbell
2 points:

1. No one wore pants in the OT.

Yes they did.

umm...trusty old "biblegateway.com," and I quote: King James search...

Sorry. No results found for "pants" in Keyword Search.
Sorry. No results found for "breeches" in Keyword Search.
Sorry. No results found for "dungarees" in Keyword Search.
Sorry. No results found for "jeans" in Keyword Search.
Sorry. No results found for "culottes" in Keyword Search.

wanna try again?

 

[saturneptune]

So being holy as He is Holy is legalistic huh? Following Christ's commandments are legalistic huh?

Like I said in my post Helen's statement accurately reflects modern-day Christendom. Live and let live for tomorrow we die and we each get our piece of paradise pie. Mine may be smaller than yours, but oh well it's paradise pie, so who cares.

And I didn't have to do anything different to get my piece. Just live like the world and enjoy all the fruits thereof and then paradise pie when I die. It's not wonder Christendom is so jacked up these days


That's just the starting point. There's more to the Christian life than eternal salvation. It's great when someone gets saved, but we've got to start allowing the Holy Spirit to guide us as you suggest. And if we don't (ie who cares about the present condition, I know I have been contaminated by the world and Christ says He needs to wash me, but Who is He to suggest such a thing) there are problems in the present, and will be problems in the future unless it is taken care of.

Actually, your statement reflects distorted Christendom. Being Holy as God is Holy is not following a set of rules, as you seem to imply, on your own ideas and power. That is legalistic. Being Holy as God is Holy is following the Holy Spirit in ones life, and faith in Christ. If you want to say it is legalistic to say " if you love Me, you will obey My commandments," go right ahead.

There is a destructive legalistic mindset here that accompishes nothing except your interpretation of Scripture, and your idea that everyone else should think as you do about it. No thanks, I will rely on the Holy Spirit.

 

[James_Newman]

This issue is as much about gender confusion as sexual provocation. In God's model He ascribes certain roles and characteristics to men and certain roles and characteristics to women. When these genders adorn themselves in the garments of the opposing gender it causes confusion of identity and confusion of roles. Then you have women working rather than being keepers of the home. You have men giving up their role as spiritual and physical leaders of the home. You have children growing up unsure of what the differences are between a man and a woman. And you have a "what's the big deal" attitude when those children grow up to "love" people of their own gender.

This is exactly right. God has placed barriers to sin, landmarks if you will. The landmarks may seem restrictive (they are) but they are placed for our own good. When we remove those landmarks, we have opened ourselves up to all kinds of assaults from the enemy. You may not think that these things are important, until you are watching your children fall into homosexuality. If they don't, praise God for His mercy, because many are.

 

[rbell]

For greater than 200+ years the predominant values of the American culture were that women were to be adorned in dresses and men in pants. In the last 3-4 decades ladies have gone to wearing the garments of men and now the beliefs of the remnant that defends the old paths is considered to have incredible thoughts.

For the first 200+ years of the occupation of the "new world," the predominant values allowed for slavery to be practiced by a significant portion of this country.

Majority opinion does not a moral directive make.

 

[saturneptune]

Should we then sin to avoid legalism? Where is your line of what are the really important sins to avoid and what is considered legalism?

Legalism is you imposing YOUR ideas on others. All Christians have the same Holy Spirit guiding them. Those following the Spirit will dress appropriately, and do not need mini lectures from legalists or deep dark depression about how bad things are today compared to the 1950s in relation to God's purpose.

 

[Amy.G]

This is exactly right. God has placed barriers to sin, landmarks if you will. The landmarks may seem restrictive (they are) but they are placed for our own good. When we remove those landmarks, we have opened ourselves up to all kinds of assaults from the enemy. You may not think that these things are important, until you are watching your children fall into homosexuality. If they don't, praise God for His mercy, because many are.

Will wearing pants cause little girls to become lesbians?

 

[SBCPreacher]

You're not about to get this guy to wear a robe all day! Not even on Sunday!

I can't believe this kind of stuff is taught from the pulpit.

 

[annsni]

Ya know, there are dresses that are immodest and pants that are modest. I wear modest clothing - women's clothing - but do not wear only dresses. I do not think that God is calling women to only dresses but to not dress like a man or visa-versa. I DO know that there is a 'thing' going on of teen boys wearing girl's clothing and I think that's gross. My teen girls and I also do not wear anything that's men's stuff - we wear women's clothing.

The Bible doesn't say "dresses" only or "skirts" only - but to dress modestly. I don't have time now, but I looked up one of the 'thigh' verses the other day and it actually meant 'calf' or 'lower leg' - hmmm - unless I wear pants, someone could see my lower leg!! Yikes!!

Ann

 

[Bro Tony]

It is hard to keep up with these guys. Is it that the women want to dress provocatively so they wear pants that show their "delicate thighs", or is it that women want to cross dress so they look like men and become gender benders? Could someone bring some explanation to us. And those who call women who wear pants a sin, it is incombant on you to provide CLEAR biblical instruction on this matter. Your preferences or narrow-minded legalism don't count.

Bro Tony

 

[annsni]

You may not think that these things are important, until you are watching your children fall into homosexuality. If they don't, praise God for His mercy, because many are.

Well, then how do you explain those who are skirts/dresses only becoming homosexuals? How about the Amish? I know that there are those who have left the Amish who are gay - maybe it was those sexy stockings!

Since there was homosexuality before women wore pants, I don't think that's a valid argument.

 

[James_Newman]

Will wearing pants cause little girls to become lesbians?

I don't think it is the actual contact with the trousers. It is probably due more to having parents that put the pants on them.