Does Your Church Have A Dress Code?

[Salty]

Time for a radical change in this discussion:

suppose a husband and wife showed up at church, in their bathing suit?

 

[pk4life]

Actually James 2:2ff is condemning the preferential treatment of the rich in the worship service.

James 2:2-7
2. For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment;
3. And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool:
4. Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?
5. Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?
6. But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats?
7. Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?

The Apostle Paul also has some choice words about this issue.

1 Corinthians 1:25-29
25. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
26. For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
27. But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
28. And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
29. That no flesh should glory in his presence.

Yeah, and what happens when the dress codes says a man should wear a tie?

 

[pk4life]

Time for a radical change in this discussion:

suppose a husband and wife showed up at church, in their bathing suit?

Suppose they do?

What do you think about it?

 

[OldRegular]

But this decorum you speak of... decorum changes with culture. You can't preach decorum, and mix it up with modesty.

Not being a preacher I don't preach but I am talking about both decorum and modesty. Although:

de·co·rum [dih-kawr-uhm, -kohr-]
noun
1.
dignified propriety of behavior, speech, dress, etc.

You might also check the synonyms.

http://thesaurus.com

 

[OldRegular]

Yeah, and what happens when the dress codes says a man should wear a tie?

If I was a member where the dress code says wear a tie I wear a tie but also a shirt, pants, socks, shoes, and underwear. Probably a coat/jacket also depending on the AC.

If the dress code was show up in shorts or less I would leave the organization.

 

[pk4life]

If I was a member where the dress code says wear a tie I wear a tie but also a shirt, pants, socks, shoes, and underwear. Probably a coat/jacket also depending on the AC.

If the dress code was show up in shorts or less I would leave the organization.

Sounds like you would be one of the ones getting preferential treatment then.

 

[OldRegular]

Time for a radical change in this discussion:

suppose a husband and wife showed up at church, in their bathing suit?

Give it time Salty. Give it time.

Actually my daughter and her husband are members of a large Church on the Georgia side of the Savannah River. He has told me that a onetime chairman of Deacons, who holds the Wed night business meeting, would show up in sweaty t-shirt and cutaway shorts after cutting grass. To me there is no excuse and this is sacrilegious at best. If I had been a member I would have objected.

 

[pk4life]

Not being a preacher I don't preach but I am talking about both decorum and modesty. Although:

de·co·rum [dih-kawr-uhm, -kohr-]
noun
1.
dignified propriety of behavior, speech, dress, etc.

You might also check the synonyms.

http://thesaurus.com

People don't generally associate the word decorum with the same things as they do modesty.

Decorum would include things like, women should wear a dress/skirt and men should wear a suit and tie.

Modesty would include things like, a bikini.. a tank top, or anything that is revealing.

 

[nodak]

We view this decorum and modesty issue much differently than Mrs. Mohler.

Rather than some standard of "dressed up" for church, we try dress properly at all times.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Looking at the many simply overwhelming posts chastising anyone for wearing less than their "Sunday best" to church, I have but one thing to say:

Legalism lives, and apparently quite well.

Tell me, do those of you who hold to the necessity of dressing per that opening line of my post here have a sign in front of your church stating, "If you want to get saved, get dressed up first!" I won't be surprised if someone of you says, "Yes!"

I'm guessin' you wouldn't darken the door of where this guy goes to church:

If you won't, good! They might actually do some good then.

 

[OldRegular]

I have but one thing to say:

Legalism lives, and apparently quite well.

That is, to put it politely, crap. Legalism has nothing to do with this discussion on dress code. Legalism has to do with earning salvation. That being said it appears that Deuteronomy 22:5 has gored a lot of oxen!

What is legalism?

In Christianity, legalism is the excessive and improper use of the law (10 commandments, holiness laws, etc). This legalism can take different forms. The first is where a person attempts to keep the Law in order to attain salvation. The second is where a person keeps the law in order to maintain his salvation. The third is when a Christian judges other Christians for not keeping certain codes of conduct that he thinks need to be observed. Let’s examine each one more closely.

http://carm.org/what-is-legalism

 

[OldRegular]

Sounds like you would be one of the ones getting preferential treatment then.

That response is pathetic!

 

[convicted1]

You are not telling me anything I don't know!

That is absolute nonsense and you should know that if you don't.

You should be ashamed of yourself Elder Willis for that snide remake about the Old Regular Baptists. Who indoctrinated you!


You are evading the issue by throwing out nonsensical claims.


You have not yet answered the following question!



When you do so we can continue the discussion!

Brother, you're making this too personal. Relax. Look, I don't know anything about pagans making dresses for men, but if a man wore a dress I wouldn't let them in the stand to preach, but I wouldn't run him off either. Dresses were never made for a man, correct. But where's your evidence that pants were made solely for a man?


Look, making dresses a requirement isn't ideal, imo. Repentance, grace, mercy, faith, salvation needs preached instead of outward appearances. If the inside gets cleaned, the outside come clean also.

 

[OldRegular]

Brother, you're making this too personal. Relax. Look, I don't know anything about pagans making dresses for men, but if a man wore a dress I wouldn't let them in the stand to preach, but I wouldn't run him off either. Dresses were never made for a man, correct. But where's your evidence that pants were made solely for a man?

I thought that would be your response. Why do you cut women some slack but none for the man? Actually as I noted earlier the Scots wear kilts and the robes that some men wore were more like dresses than pants.

The point is that the shape of clothes is irrelevant. It is the fact that in the western culture women wore dresses for centuries. Some years ago they started wearing pants. Deuteronomy 22:5 condemns this and to demonstrate that this is correct I posted several modern translations of that passage.

 

[convicted1]

I thought that would be your response. Why do you cut women some slack but none for the man? Actually as I noted earlier the Scots wear kilts and the robes that some men wore were more like dresses than pants.

The point is that the shape of clothes is irrelevant. It is the fact that in the western culture women wore dresses for centuries. Some years ago they started wearing pants. Deuteronomy 22:5 condemns this and to demonstrate that this is correct I posted several modern translations of that passage.

Where is your evidence that pants were made solely for men? Where is your evidence that dresses were made solely made for women? Kilts are acceptable for Scots, so if a Scottish preacher preaches in a kilt, would you leave?

 

[convicted1]

Okay Brother Baker, let's both step back, take a deep breath, and look at this objectively. I see Deut. 22:5 as pertaining to that time of both wearing robes. I agree that men shouldn't wear dresses. But, I can not find anywhere where pants were made solely for men. If they were, then I'll concede that point. But too many churches address people's outward appearances and fail to address the mess they're in inwardly. Preach Jesus to the lost, watch Him save His sheep, and He'll cause the outward to come clean also.

Also, forgive me for the Union Assoc remark. The assoc I was raised around, they'd turn women out for cutting their hair, and wearing pants, but have people who lived "on the draw", but could always deer hunt, coon hunt, squirrel hunt, ride four wheelers all day long, etc. They had people who also wouldn' t pay their debts, either. However, they wouldn't turn them out either. I know this for fact too, because most of them were my relatives.

 

[Jerome]

OldRegular, I just had to chuckle when you declared "Mrs. Mohler is correct". Did you click the link and see the lady modeling a Mrs.-Albert-Mohler-approved dressy pantsuit?

Baptist Press

Would that lady be welcome at a church following your code?

 

[convicted1]

OldRegular, I just had to chuckle when you declared "Mrs. Mohler is correct". Did you click the link and see the lady modeling a Mrs.-Albert-Mohler-approved dressy pantsuit?

Baptist Press

Would that lady be welcome at a church following your code?

And I agree with what Mrs. Mohler said. She never mentioned dresses only, and even said short shorts weren't allowed for her kids. I know this is not for church, but apparently it was okay for them to wear shorts in public.

 

[convicted1]

OldRegular, I just had to chuckle when you declared "Mrs. Mohler is correct". Did you click the link and see the lady modeling a Mrs.-Albert-Mohler-approved dressy pantsuit?

Baptist Press

Would that lady be welcome at a church following your code?

Boy, that was the prettiest pants suit I ever saw...:laugh:

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

That is, to put it politely, crap. Legalism has nothing to do with this discussion on dress code. Legalism has to do with earning salvation. That being said it appears that Deuteronomy 22:5 has gored a lot of oxen!

CARM's wrong, and I've seen that "definition" before. "Legalism" is excessive adherence to any law or formula, and the "legalism" dress codes in the church adhere to are the pious attitudes of those who think they have a right to dictate to others about how they worship the Lord God Almighty. News for those of you that describes: He don't care!!!

Proverbs 51, NASB
14 Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God, the God of my salvation;
Then my tongue will joyfully sing of Your righteousness.
15 O Lord, open my lips,
That my mouth may declare Your praise.
16 For You do not delight in sacrifice, otherwise I would give it;
You are not pleased with burnt offering.
17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit;
A broken and a contrite heart, O God, You will not despise.​

... no matter how it dresses. If a man or woman comes into a church seeking Him in rags, pleading for forgiveness, understanding, and salvation -- crying, "Be merciful to me, O God, a sinner!" -- He isn't going to say to him/her, "Nope, gotta go home and change into something presentable before I'll hear you." However, it appears there are some churches represented on this forum that just might.