4boys4joys said:
I just wanted to know if you were there to see how long the coats were ? How do you know this ?
That question goes both ways, if you are trying to suggest they were "dressed" quite as much as we are today. Most depictions of the early "clothes" show them as scant compared to ours for a reason. They were in a very warm climate. Just as long as the private and other possibly "tempting" areas were covered, that would be enough. Then, when the modern civilization was shaped by more northern cultures, we became used to even more covering, and less would look "indecent".
Meanwhile, Islamic culture takes this "covering" to the extreme, and has the woman covered from head to toe, even in the hot desert. They call Western "Christian" dress "indecent" and even blame it for all our "immorality".
Wear a t-shirt to church,I will try it and see how well it goes over when I tell my pastor that it is OK. Arewe looking for an out to make ourselves comfy instead of using common sense and the Holy Spirit.
"common Sense"? A bathing suit, yes. But you're talking about a
T-Shirt, now. That is not even showing anything indecent. It's just not "dressed up". But as I always ask, since when did a Western, secular
business suit become "sacred garb", where that is God's standard? That is not "common sense" at all, and it is not a universal conviction of the Spirit either.
If your p[astor objects, that is his own personal conviction based on tradition, not a universal command of God.
If a hip hop church was not an issue this thread would have died along time ago. It is not about who can prove the best point it is about making our churches distinct enough for people to see the gospel without mistaking that God is not pleased with worldliness. When you have to ask it usually means you should'nt. The bigger picture is what does God want, not how we can justify doing something we have to question this intently.
And you have to show that God does not want hip hop or any other modern style, and that He DOES want "traditional" Western styles. Thatis where your side fails. We don't choose 200 year old music just to "look different" just for the same of looking different. Meanwhile, all anyone hears from the same Churches that do that is the same old human tendencies to be self-righteous and look down on others, using music and worship among other issues for that goal. That is where, for all their musical "distinction", people will see them as the same as everyone else in the world, and your "different music" will not impress them at all. Trying to use music for our "difference", you will have completely missed the boat.
As I say on my page on this issue
http://members.aol.com/etb700/ccm.html
"...both approaches of trying to avoid styles to look "different", OR the
depending on of the use of those styles as our means of winning people are misguided."
The reason the issue or the thread doesn't die is because there are people whose convictions think hip hop is wrong. The problem is, them trying to make that a universal preference of God, in favor of some other equally "worldly" style, when He says not such thing at all. The scripture does not say, for issues like this, "if someone,
anyone anywhere questions it, for any reason, just avoid it". It tell us we should consider the feelings of those who question it, and not engage in it around them. But the problem here is not people bringing hip-hop or other styles into old Fundamentalist churches, it's that the Fundamentalists are trying to stamp the styles off the face of the earth, even when people use them in their own churches, and not imposing them on those who don't like it. That is defintely not supported by scripture. Rather than reacting at something being imposed on them, they're the ones trying to control and impose upon everyone else, and thus are shown to be the ones in violation of the scriptures on resolving issues of conscience like this.