Modesty

Post #1

Part 2


Funny that you don't give me another option in your arrogant list of reasons to sit on the first pew! I sit there so I'm not distracted. Did you copy that? I bet when you go to a concert you want to be on the first row... don't you? Why is it any different in God's House? Well, after all, I guess it would be with you because I doubt you'd wear your farm clothes to a concert anyway. I want to be there so I can get the best seat... you stay focused. You feel the heat coming off the preacher, so to speak, lol.

I saw as much leg as I needed to see. I saw enough leg to say it was all, OK? It doesn't need to be 100% all of her leg for it to be immodest, does it? I called it a trash bag because it was slouchy. It looked like it needed to be in the trash. And yes, the thing hugged her "other parts" of her body so much that I was embarrassed for the girl to even get out of her seat. Maybe a trash bag would have been more modest... maybe the commercial kind my school uses... heavy duty too to make sure it's all covered!


Why would I recognize her role as a mother? I didn't know the woman, never seen her before, and to be correct, I never saw her child. Nor did she come back for church that night. The nerve of some people, huh? It's not my duty to recognize her role of a mother. In fact, while we're on this issue, how come you observe mother's day when that's no where in scripture and they want to bring it into the church, yet you need scripture to dress up for the King? You'll dress up for mother's day, though. You'll dress up for yourself and everyone else, but not the King. I'm puzzled.

Just what about a bare-back to I find distressing? The same reason I find bare-legs, bare-stomach, bare-breasts, and so forth distressting... NAKEDNESS! Do you think God would approve of you going around dressed like that? Why uncover the back? WHY? WHY? WHY? WHY? DID YOU HEAR??? WHY??!!


So you're telling me that an uncovered back is okay just because it won't cause a man to stumble? Well, it causes me to stumble. Know why? Because an uncovered woman goes against God's law. That's why! Do I need a better reason? I don't think 1 Timothy 2:9 allowed the exception of the back, do you? I'd hate to know it thought the naked back was modest. Actually, that would contradict the whole verse!


What I find disturbing is your alleged claim that I may find a bare-back "sexual" in a "small child." Ma'am, I'll ask that you refrain from such comments. I never once said that the child's dress ran "sexually" through my head yet I said that it was wrong and I pitied the mother. In fact, I even refuted donnaA's claim that I "ogled" the girls. That comment was out of line totally! No evidence supported your allegation when actually it shot it down.


Ed... I'm not getting to details about what "modest" means and how it is referenced in the Bible, but read this...

[ source: http://www.momof9splace.com/talkmodesty.html ]


And the skirt you were referring to was not 'a skirt' that women wear today; it is the end of something.


From the genuine Webster 1828-


SKIRT, n.
1. The lower and loose part of a coat or other garment; the part below the waist; as the skirt of a coat or mantle. 1 Sam.15.
2. The edge of any part of dress.
3. Border; edge; margin; extreme part; as the skirt of a forest; the skirt of a town.

I'm not addressing the footwear issue any longer. For the very first post, everything I said about footwear was taken out of context. I will remove my claim that they didn't wear them to God's House. There is no telling what footwear they wore back then, but with the footwear we have today, there is no excuse to go almost "barefooted."


C4K... see above.


Beth.. do you really think I haven't seen those scriptures before in my fight for what's right? Perhaps you should read my answer back to him, OK?

 

I missed it Shane. Could you show me the passage that says this please?

I have never seen a verse about skirts and trousers and who should wear them in my own KJV.


Modesty - of course.

 

C4K, Read the definition of apparel and you'll see the answer. Not today's definition, but the biblical definition.

 

Since you have the understanding Shane, please explain to me how apparel mean a loose skirt on a woman and baggy trousers on a man. Besides, you implied that the God of the KJV holds that standard. All I want is evidence.

 

C4K... in all seriousness, I have given you the biblical defintion of apparel from Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words. Tell me how you concluded that apparel did not mean anything other than a long, loose, flowing outer garmet?

 

No problem with that - you defined skirts and trousers though. So does that go for very culture in the world? Even cultures where men wear robes? When the get saved do they need to go out and buy trousers and shirts?

I am not going to argue with you Shane - your large and bolded letters are offensive and condescending. It is no more acceptable to shout here than in public.

 

The Webster dictionary defined skirt as the end of a garment for those scriptures, CK4. The Webster dictionary also defined skirt as a womens garment. That was not in reference to the scriptures posted.

 

Hey Shane, nice rant you had. Do you feel better now?

Now, how about going back and reading for a third time what I posted and then respond chohently to each seperate arguement without mixing the topics of wearing ones "best" to church and modesty. Those are two separate topics. Treat them as such.

I may not be back until much later.

Have a good day!

 

For your information, menageriekeeper, the topics were discussed separately and for your convenience, were discussed in order from your previous post. (note 'Part 2' ) I made sure of that because I had it pulled up in another window while I composed my post.

Have a nice day yourself too! :wavey:

 

Wise counsel here, menageriekeeper. I would hope that Brother Shane does exactly that, as to keeping different subjects separately.

As is C4K, I am still waiting for some Scripture to back some of the comments made.

BTW, I cannot find the book of "Webster's" anywhere in my KJV. Maybe another could help with my search.

Unfortunately (or fortunately, as the case may be) I do not have the time, at least this AM, to get deep into this stuff, today.

Ed

 

no

I'm not sure who you are talking about.....born again believers or the unsaved in New England?

I was speaking of born again believers in New England being pretty conservative...that has been our experience here. You should come and fellowship at our church next time you are in New Hampshire....Merrimack Valley Baptist Church....I don't think you will be offended here.

love,
Beth

 

Yeah ...hide all that nasty ole female skin. It's shameful to see someone's back. Maybe a burqa is good...that way you don't see anything, not even a naked cheek or nose. Might make you stumble, so let's cover them all!

The inanity of some peoples' thinking (or lack thereof) never ceases to be a source of amazement and amusement!

 

I simply cannot think of one time when a person who was growing in Christ that modesty ever was an issue for very long. The passages that talk about such things are very easy to read and understand.

 

Even if I dressed that way I'd still be in trouble. I've been told many times, embarrassingly, that I have beautiful eyes. In a better picture of me you'd be able to see they are nice(I'd rather not). But I'd rather not have to hear it.

Being covered heard to toe isn't always going to insure a man doesn't look at a woman.
And of course then we'de be muslims.

 

Are you always this defensive?

Well since you obviously feel that the rant you produced is the best you can do to present and defend your opinions, I'll try to focus my dyslexic self and wade through the mud and see if I can find any solid ground. Oh, and for your information, I will also be using two windows so I don't miss anything.

Nope, what I am seriously asking you for is scripture to defend your idea that everyone should dress up for the King. C4K has asked over and over for this same bit of scripture.

Well, aside from the belt and boots, this is what I myself wear to church. Thing is, this is what I wear every day as well.

Where is the scripture saying that I should set aside a certain set of garments that I will use only for going to church so that I look different than I did at home? Will my heart look any different to God all dressed up in my church duds?

Well let's see what I could be telling God: If my clothes are modest, though daily wear, I am telling God that I am willing to abide by His command.

My modest daily wear clothes also tell God that I am going to church to worship Him and not draw attention to myself by wearing clothing that couldn't be afforded by many in my congregation.

Or, I could be telling God that I perfer denim to polyester!

What do you think you are telling God by your choice of uniform and what does it say to Him that you believe that others should unquestioningly follow your perferred view of dress?

Well if you are going to prescribe such for the rest of us to follow, why can't you speak authoritively from the scripture? If you are going to tell someone that they must honor God in this way you also need to be able to tell them why. If it's only your opinion that they do, then there is no need for all this rant. Much, much wiser to say what you do and why and allow for differences among the brethern.

I'll be back later, I have to take a kid to the doc.

 

hummm, seems we've been over this before here, and still no one can show this in scriture.

Jesus must have been slouchy too then huh.

How many changes of clothies do you think Jesus and the spostles had? Seems I remember Jesus telling them, and I think this was when He sent out the 70, to take nothing with them. Not even a different change of clothes to worship in.
This idea of yours is foreign to scritpure.

From reading your posts all I can say you sure must believe this because you sure can't find your junk in the bible at all.

If you can't prove it with scritpure it doesn't exsist, you can not add to scripture.

So, use scripture, not culture, to show us what a harlot looked like then.

I'm sure, but show in scripture where we are told exactly which clothing to wear when and where, what times and purposes.

 

Extremely arrogant and distasteful judgement on someone you admit you do not know.
If you've enver seen her before, is it possible she was a guest, ever heard that word? Maybe she was visiting her mother or even her husbands mother, she was from out of town, which would explain why she didn't come back.
She is a mother because she has a child, it has nothing to do with your arrogance, and your false judgement on her as a mother, you have no real idea, you just make it up as you go.

proverbs 31
28Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her

whose defination of apparel, not God's, unless you have a verse.

Ed Sutton=

You'll keep on waiting too. People with a lot of OPINION about how others should dress never have scripture.

 

I have 10 minutes before I have to walk out the door, but let's see how far I can get.

You hope it's a personal thing or it is a personal thing. Do try for clarity. Taking it that you mean dressing up is a personal thing between you and God, that is fine. What you do in God's name will be rewarded (the cup of cold water promise applies here).

It's not that others can't, but that their method of showing love, gratitude and thankfullness, differs from your own. Why do you have a problem with that?

And here again, why does this bother you if it doesn't bother God who never in scripture commands us to dress any differently for worship than we dress in our everyday lives? Don't presume that this is simple common sense as the very fact that so many of us here disagree on this issue means it is not. And common sense is rarely a defensible position.

Really? And what makes it truth, if the only truth we have to go by is scripture and you don't seem to have any?

It would be disrespectful to dress any time in immodest clothing( and modesty is mixing the topics), but it is not disrespectful to not dress up for church. Btw, dressing up for dinner or a movie is likewise a constraint of man.

Well I don't see why not. If you are going to demand we worship God in a particular dress I have the duty to search the scriptures to see if it is so. It's that whole priesthood of the believer thingy.

And I just know you are not questioning my love for the Savior. Such I believe is akin to questioning my salvation and is against BB rules.

10 minutes are up, see you later.

 

There's really no need for me to respond to the entire thing, because mk and donna have done a nice job of responding. They've done so well that I might be tempted to say that school's in session.

But, with 300+ posts, Brother Shane, you ought to know by now that we tend to ask for Scriptural support around here. If you're a pastor, maybe you're used to your people not asking for Scriptural support, but that's not how we roll, so to speak, around here.

In the interest of helping you further, let me say that writing in bold letters and excessive capitalization makes us think you're yelling and screaming. Maybe you are, but this isn't church. We discuss things here in calm tones (mostly), not yell and scream until somebody listens. Writing in a calm, even tone goes a lot further than yelling does.

Finally, peppering your rants with "amen" everytime you write something you like is rather silly.

Hope this helps you out. :wavey:

 

If you all were forced to live inside a teenager or a young adults body for just one hour, I bet you would all understand Shane's point of view a little more.

Teenagers have raging hormones, it's normal. Now try to speak THRU this discomfort about what causes this discomfort, it is difficult. Clearly, everyone here has an advantage due to age. OR a disadvantage, due to they really can't imagine the effect dress can have on a person.



He's a teenager