Question women and dresses

j_barner...at least three posts in the last two days!

Good to hear from you again, friend.

 

Good perspective!

Don't worry about the sweat, we all get worked up once in awhile.

 

Posted by FBCPastorswife: Just one of many issues that a lot of people just have to agree to disagree on.

We certainly can. Lets just agree that it is your preference to wear what you consider to be your best for God. There is no scriptural basis for requiring women to wear dresses or skirts all the time.

Posted by Biblemama: I also feel it is right to wear dresses/skirts etc.. Long ones that covers the knees.

Good for you. So do I. As long as we know our preferences are not bible.

Posted by Biblemama: In my church, my pastor also believes in this issue. He does not condemn the ones who sray in with pants, jeans, short skirts, sleevless etc.. but when I became a part of the ministry, I am required to wear a skirt.

I agree that when representing our church in ministry ladies should wear dresses or skirts. That is my preference.

Posted by TexasSky: Soulman, Why was your Pastor ogling your daughter anyway?

I wouldn't go that far but I do think he was overstepping his authority. A church can have preferences on how they like to do things. That is called church polity. If everyone agrees, then fine. You don't have to go there if you don't want.

However, many of us are entrenched in ministry and have been for some years. It is just not that easy to get up and go. Rules change as a church grows. It just seems to me that if a church is going to enforce a dress code and make others feel less than they are, there should be some bible to back it up.

As right as something sounds, if it aint in the bible, NNE should push it on anyone.

 

I love and respect a church that will not compromise their doctrines and stand for the word of God.

Standards are important also. We just have to be careful to teach them as standards and preferences. Not bible doctrines.

 

USN... It is good to be back. Between pastoring, working 6 days a week and studying through Andersonville, I have been bsy. I have lurked some, but as the folks who know me know, some topics are too tempting not to speak my piece.

 

hello everyone! i also believe that women should dress according to the situation. i believe wearing pants is not a sin. but, someone stated earlier that pants were considered to be sexy women wear in the past. but now pants are such a norm, they can be considered modest. now these days "normal dress" is becoming very "untasteful." the future may consider this type of fashion modest. again i think pants can be worn, but where do we draw the line? fashion evolves at a rapid pace. i just hope that in the future we dont have debates whether or not women are allowed to wear bathing suits to church. what are everyone's thoughts on this?

 

California is a very large state. It really depends on where you live. I live in Orange County, which is moderately conservative. Folks tend to judge CA by Los Angeles (moderately liberal) and San Francisco (very liberal), discarding less populated regions. (Compared to SF and LA, every other region is "less populated").

 

anyone!? i need help because my girlfriend will be talking to her pastor's wife on this issue and she needs all the help. thanks!

 

It's really a no-brainer.

Scripturally, we (male and famale) are required to dress modestly. However, scripture does not define modesty. Modesty in Maui is different than modesty in the Ukraine. One can dress modestly and immodestly regardless of whether it's a dress, skirt, skorts, leggings, or toga. Requiring a woman to refrain from pants in fvor of long dresses is not scripturally supportable, and qualifies as legalistic. If a church claims to be bible believing, then it cannot enforce dresses as a scriptural mandate. However, a church does, imo, have the right to enforce traditional customs. For example, in parts of the world, wearing shoes into church would be disrespectful. Churches there require that people cast off their shows prior to entering. Many churches in the US have an "appropriate attire required" policy. A church has the right to enforce such traditions. They only stray if they claim that those customs and traditions are a scriptural mandate.

 

i agree John, but should the world's definition of modesty be the same as the church's? like i stated earlier, what happens if the world believes wearing a bathing suit to church is modest? should we evolve when the world does?

 

Each community, imo, has the right to decide this for themselves. Each community is the world, whether the community is a church community or other community.

In Maui in June, this might well be the norm, and it's perfectly acceptible for them to do this. I myself have seen this, and no one considered it immodest at all. They should no more be required to "cover up" just because, say, your church decides they should, nor should your church decide to wear bathing suits just because they do.

Times change. This is one of those issue where, yes, the perception of modesty changes.

 

hmmmmm.....i believe that we shouldnt change as the world changes. dont we preach against that? i think the "perception" of modesty should be set by us christians instead of the world. right?

 

If the standard of modesty doesn't change, then we should adopt modest A.D. 1st century clothing.

 

Where scripture speaks, we should speak. Where scripture is silent, we should be silent. Scripture instructs Christians to dress modestly. Scripture does not, however, tell us what the minimal guidelines for modesty are (such as, how high the hem shound be, etc).

But, let's assume your statement is correct (that the perception of modesty should be set by us christians). Which Christian gets overruled? The one in Kaanapali, Maui, or the one in Anghorage, Alaska?

 

hahaha....i dont think modesty changes. Fashion does.

 

modesty never changed. cover your bodies up! whether it be alaska or hawaii modesty is the same, fashion differs. shouldnt we reflect Christ? i dont think Christ would be wearing swimming trunks to a church service.

 

You're welcome to fly out to Hawaii, visit every church that meets on or near the beach, and tell them that they're not dressing in accordance with scriptural modesty.

They'll likely think you're being pharasaical, and tell you to go back to the mainland. And they're be right in doing so.

Paul says "let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or Sabbaths..." I think that can apply to judging other people by what they wear as well. If it is modest to the congregation, then let no one judge them.

 

So ankles and wrists are verboten?

If we should set the standard, why are we allowing Muslims to beat us in the court of modesty? One would think we should endeavor to be the most modest.

I personally think that modesty varies by culture. We should dress modestly according to the culture we live in. I don't think that Adam and Eve were given head to foot fur robes by God. . . Most impractical.