how the men dress

I am wondering what you mean by 'station in life' which has nothing to do with clothing one is wearing.

 

Kate "station in life" is a very normal comment, while it has nothing to do with clothing it has everything to do with HCL describing what attracted her to her husband. Do you really not understand the meaning?
Murph

 

I refuse to allow this to go any further down the path to anger that these topics have traveled before. Please make certain of my intent to keep this and the other threads concerning clothing clean. Whatever happened before has no bearing here, please don't let old problems surface. Play nice or don't play at all.

Murph

 

According to 1 Cor. 11, our clothing is to display our rank, or "station in life."

 

I understadn 'station in life' to be what kind of job, not just a job, to be how much money does he make. When I married my husband he worked on a farm as a hired hand, at $10. a day, and farm work can not be done daily, it depends on the weather. He worked like this for the next 10 years(althought a few years before he left the farm he did have a raise to $12. a day, and during tobacco time he made more, as thats all hourly pay). So no I did not marry him for his 'station in life'. I married him becasue I loved him. So yes I understand the meaning quite well.
And I did ask someone else the question please.

[ March 25, 2003, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: kate B...007 ]

 

Does that mean the more money you make the fancy and pricey our clothing is to be? I guess that elimimnates a lot of people from wanting to go to your church, thay don't want to feel like they are less of a human becasue they can't dress fancy.
edited becasue my fingers got all wickywacky on the key board and spelled wrong bunches of stuuf they did.

 

The main focus in 1 Cor. 11 is rank and how our dress is to maintain the distinction.

3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.
5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.
9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.

I won't quibble about the "station in life" phrase, but I have always used the phrase and heard it used in connection with the ideas of prestige or rank, and I think that is the common usage.

 

I honestly do not mind leaving it to some of the men here to answer for me. Because I agree with what some of them are saying.
Anyway, back to the station in life thing. I will try to explain exactly what I meant and then leave it at that. It is as Aaron said. When I saw my husband, I thought he was employed, a leader and educated. These were the things that *I* saw as attractive.

Not that he was rich or had fancy clothes on. He did not. He had long sleeves on and long pants at the time. And I said earlier, if he had speedos and was shirtless it would have made me think otherwise about him.

 

Now, concerning men:

1 Thess 4:
4 That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour;
5 Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God:
6 That no man go beyond and defraud his brother in any matter: because that the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also have forewarned you and testified.
7 For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness.

The word translated modest in the verses dealing with women's clothing is translated as "of good behavior" in 1 Tim. 3:2 in the qualifications of a bishop. Then Dr. Vine quotes an authority (I haven't figured out the abbreviations yet, but here they are "Trench, Syn. §xcii.") saying,

indicating that it was understood a man must dress modestly.

Dress is more than protection, it is communication and behavior as well.

 

we've had people who didn't think he had to dress modest. I think men also have a responsability to dress modest.

 

This is coming from someone with no experience with the opposite sex in a romantic context. . .
but I believe the theory is that boys are more physically stimulated while girls are more emotionally/mentally stimulated. Not that girls aren't physically stimulated, but not as much as boys. Boys are incredibly driven by their senses. And that seems to be generally accurate from my limited experience. I don't think most girls have the slightest clue just how potent their looks are to guys. I'm trying to think of how to describe it, but I can't. Most guys I know, both Christian and non, seem to care about a girls looks first, and second is stratospheres behind. OTOH, my girl friends seem to be more interested about the "inside."

I always found that funny too. To me, dresses are more stimulating then pants(assuming that we're comparing loose pants to loose dresses or tight pants to tight dresses, not combining the two). I'm curious whether this is the general consensus or I'm an anomaly. If I'm in the majority, then shouldn't women be wearing pants instead of skirts???

Nice find Su. I guess we can agree on something outside of music. We know that whatever Joseph was wearing wasn't held on too tightly, because Potipher's wife was able to grab it and it came off. Anyone know what the high ranking slaves would have worn in that day in Egypt? I believe it would have been a simple robe/cloak type garment with a loin clothe underneath.

Well if the guys at your school wear the same style as the guys here, then they would be following your interpretation of Isaiah 43, most high school guys' shorts go down to, and usually past, the knee. I wear shorts whenever it starts to get warm, and all of mine go down that far. Not because of modesty, just because that's the style I like. I'd like to wear shorts to church during the summer, but my parents won't let me. Oh well, I'll live for one more summer.

God bless,
`JD

 

What's wrong with wearing shorts to church? They don't bother me as long as they are not sexually explicit. The shorts I wear come down to the knees.

Here in St. Louis, it gets close to 100 degrees in July and August and I wear them because they are comfortable. Also, sometimes I go to my parents' cabin (where we have no a/c) or camping for the weekend and I pack only shorts. When I go camping or to my parents' cabin I do not miss church and yes, I am in shorts. Also, I might be doing some outdoor activity immediately after church and I do not want to be out in the St. Louis heat with long pants on.

There are other things about the way people dress when coming to church that DO bother me, as JonathanDT will attest to, but wearing shorts is not one of them.

Bill C.

P.S. In case any of you are curious about what DOES bother me in the way of appropriate attire in church, see my thread in the "Youth" forum.

 

Although psychological tests cannot be a determinng factor in understanding biblical principles (if they could, fornication would be alright for one's emotional stability), these tests do support the theory that men are more visually stimulated then women, and women are more linguistically stimulated than men. I recall one such test where groups of men and of women were given 5 pictures to look at while sensitive cameras measure the expansion or contraction of the pupils of their eyes. The only difference was the men's pictures included a nude (or almost nude) woman, and the women's included a nude (or almost nude) man. The men were by far the most reactive to the picture of the woman, but the women reacted most to a picture of a mother and child. I cannot recall what the other 3 pictures were of.

As for men's suits, I do know that long ago it was considered improper for a man to remove his coat with a lady present; it was thought of as wearing his undershirt. That is the reason for those 3 useless buttons on the sleeve of a dress coat; so if a man needed to get his shirt cuffs out of the way, he could button them to his coat sleeve. So men's suits today, with those useless buttons and such a useless piece of garb as a tie, are vain throwbacks to earlier times. It is completely unsound reasoning that wearing these forms of attire shows "respect for God" or any such principle. They may catch the vain eye of man-- or woman-- but that is all they accomplish.

 

I may be the only man in the world who actually enjoys wearing ties!

I take a lot of pride in my appearance (not false boastful pride, just pride in the good sense), and I always want to look my best. In my work at the university, I want to look as "GQ professional" as possible, so I put a lot of time into it. Ties are a must in my wardrobe, and I have quite a few!

I like to go shopping with my wife in looking for good clothing, from the ties mentioned above all the way to the shoes that I wear. She is my fashion consultant, and I never buy anything without her input. She is also a bargain hound, always sniffing out the best deals and the largest discounts on top items. I would never go out shopping without her! And yes, I love going shopping when she buys things for herself. Then, I am HER fashion consultant.

One of the best moves I ever made was opening an account at the Men's Wearhouse, where I swear by their clothing and superior service. So men, if you are looking for a great outlet, then I highly recommend the Men's Wearhouse. You will like the way you look! I guarantee it.

Great topic, Helen! Thanks for posting it.


mozier

 

I saw this somewhere else, but I don't think they would mind me using it. We are to dress as if we are going to see the King when we attend church. Meaning, our best. Away from church in the public eye, cover your flesh. This goes for both MAN and WOMAN.

 

Don't get me wrong, if all you had was shorts and tank tops, please come to church, but if your saved you ought to set the highest example. Some would call it a good testimony.

 

Potiphar's wife was most likely an old Pro at this and he was just young and available and fresh meat so to speak. He could have been in a suit of armor and she would have tried to seduce him.