are women responsible for men's sin?

2PhiloVoid said:

This is so reductionistic it's pitiful.

Click to expand...

So you are not responsible for your sins? That is so wrong.

Oh.....so the "deception" of another human being, leading that other person into some kind of malfeasance on any level ....is the fault of the person so deceived?

Click to expand...

I never said that the person whose deliberate actions might cause another to sin won’t face their own judgment for having done so. Nevertheless we are each responsible for our own sins.

You presume way too much. I did answer you, and I did so by dismissing your supposed "one-size fits all" hypo.

Click to expand...

Dismissing is not answering.

Man. I sure hope you don't hold some judicial position somewhere, because I'd hate to have you presiding over anything.

Click to expand...

When posters start making personal attacks such as this, you know that they have no valid argument. I have attempted to engage in a civil discussion; sad that you cannot do the same.

Archivist said:

So would.a topless man who is smiling at women and tolling with them being immodest?

Click to expand...

Yes. Vs trying to stay cool cutting the grass,absolutely. It's about intent.

Dave G. said:

Yes. Vs trying to stay cool cutting the grass,absolutely. It's about intent.

Click to expand...

And if you have read the thread you know that I have referenced intent. The problem is taht some posters in the thread think that a topless woman on a beach is always responsible for causing men to lust, even if it is a beach were going topless is the norm.

Archivist said:

So would.a topless man who is smiling at women and tolling with them being immodest?

Click to expand...

If tolling means flirting, toying; then yes it would be immodest if it was done just to rouse lustful attraction. This is a shady area because we are wired to do this. However, it is acting in the flesh to do so. I would assume the proper way to get to know someone would be to act with love and to protect them from being governed by the flesh by dressing modestly.

Archivist said:

And if you have read the thread you know that I have referenced intent. The problem is taht some posters in the thread think that a topless woman on a beach is always responsible for causing men to lust, even if it is a beach were going topless is the norm.

Click to expand...

I hope that I am not being classed as one of those. I said it wasn't immodest, but if one is deliberately flirting on said beach then the intent is not modest.

Sammy-San said:

isnt breast/nipple exposure nudity?

Click to expand...

On a beach, in an area where many other people are sunbathing, with the intent to get a suntan I do not think it inherently is anymore.

In public, in our respective societies then yes it is. We are very sexualised. Sex sells, we are bombarded by it in sublimilal ways constantly. Women are awfully objectified and now women are objectifying men too.

However, a women breastfeeding should not be classed as immodest. Done properly there is not much to see. It is what breasts were designed for.

Sammy-San said:

what if going naked was the norm?

Click to expand...

Then it wouldn't be a problem for someone to go naked.

Sam91 said:

If tolling means flirting, toying; then yes it would be immodest if it was done just to rouse lustful attraction. This is a shady area because we are wired to do this. However, it is acting in the flesh to do so. I would assume the proper way to get to know someone would be to act with love and to protect them from being governed by the flesh by dressing modestly.

Click to expand...

I agree, but, again, some on this thread think that it is immodest if a woman is wearing a bikini on a typical American beach (where it is quite normal for women to wear bikinis) with no intent to arouse lustful attraction or for a woman to go topless on a topless beach, again with no intent to arouse lustful attraction..

Sammy-San said:

isnt breast/nipple exposure nudity?

Click to expand...

In much of the world it is not.

Archivist said:

I agree, but, again, some on this thread think that it is immodest if a woman is wearing a bikini on a typical American beach (where it is quite normal for women to wear bikinis) with no intent to arouse lustful attraction or for a woman to go topless on a topless beach, again with no intent to arouse lustful attraction..

Click to expand...

I will be going swimming tomorow in a bathing suit. My friend in a bikini. I will not judge her for it, she can wear what she wants. I for one am wearing a swimming costume to be more covered than if in a bikini. However, I could be more modest and weqr the skirt version. However, if I did some guy might find that interesting too.

I could just not go swimming but it is my daughter's birthday and am taking her because kids love swimming. I go on Tuesdays for toddler's lessons and on a Thursday to exercise. I do not feel immodest in a costume, thankfully. I have never noticed anyone particularly looking. But I'm not interested if anyone is looking anyway, my intent is the activity. One time I saw someone from my old church and he went to hug me. I had to refuse the hug, which was a surprise to him that I didn't think it proper. He didn't ask for explanation but I saw him work it out. I conclude that the guy was there for swimming rather than looking at women, so the thought of modesty hadn't entered his head. I was still just a sister in Christ; not an object to be appreciated but a person to be respected. It might have been right for him to hug me but it wasn't right for me to hug in that attire.

I would think on the beach that it is the intent behind the bikini which matters. I, for one, will not buy my daughter a bikini because I see them as wrong on a child. A child has no breasts so I think it is inappropriate to put one on. I remember as a child just wearing knickers on the beach if I didn't have my costume.

Other women they can decide for themselves what to wear. A christian women ought to carefully evaluate her choice.

A christian man ought to control himself and allow her to have her own choice; without blaming her for his own folly. If we do not take full responsibility for our own actions we can not have real integrity, or repentance.

Also, a Christian man visiting the beach should know his own mind. Surely walking in the Spirit helps in this scenario. If he can't control himself he should probably avoid going to the beach.

Matthew 5:29

Sammy-San said:

So wearing that attire does mean something.

Click to expand...

It depends on the person. However, we are not responsible for others actions. We are responsible on how we react in response. A man can't blame others or expect society at large to change for him. He can lean on God and focus on what is pure (philippians 4:8-9) and not on what he ought to avoid.

He should examine the plank in his own eye and learn to love women as his sisters in the Lord. Not judge them on their clothes and to practice learning self control. The more focus paid to whether something is wrong, the more it will be noticed.

(Women too, I am at a season in life where this an issue for me. The stench of hypocrisy surrounds me. I am grateful for this stink though, it shows me that I need to stop allowing myself to look. I wonder if heavy exercise is causing it, temptation in general or the fact I am becoming attracted to someone at church is producing chemicals in my brain)

Sammy-San said:

Women aren't to cause men to sin-that is sin.

For example, im not talking about not covering a pretty face-thats like saying people go to hell because Christians dont evangelize them.

Click to expand...

I am sorry Sammy-san but I could not be responsible for you sinning. To sin or to obey is always your choice.

I could be an innocent bystander or deliberately do something to be a stumbling block. However, you would be responsible for what you did regardless. I would be responsible only if I had also sinned.

Men have the power inside them to not sin. Read 1 John 1. It says 'if we have no sin we lie'. It also says that 'if we are in Him we do not go on sinning' (EDIT ok this bit isn't in chapter 1 but it is in 1 John 3:6. ) Thankfully it also says that 'If we do sin we have God who is merciful and just to forgive us of our sin'. Sorry for the paraphrasing. But in Him we have the gift of self control. Relying on Him men do not have to stumble at every block they see.

'Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge Him and He will direct your paths' Proverbs 3:5-6

Sammy-San said:

Women aren't to cause men to sin-that is sin.

For example, im not talking about not covering a pretty face-thats like saying people go to hell because Christians dont evangelize them.

Click to expand...

Sam, just where do we draw the line? Some men are turned on by women in tennis dresses. Should women playing tennis be required to cover up because some men can’t control themselves, even though the women have no intent to cause m n to lust, they just want to play sports. A woman on a topless beach probably isn’t trying to turn men on, she just wants to get a good tan. Men are responsible for their sins, not women.

And I notice that you didn’t mention anything about men causing women to sin. Is that alright on your opinion?

Sammy-San said:

So wearing that attire does mean something.

Also, Nudity now has implications of sinfulness attached to it. With few exceptions, the Bible presents nakedness as shameful and degrading (Genesis 9:21; Exodus 20:26; 32:25; 2 Chronicles 28:19; Isaiah 47:3; Ezekiel 16:35-36; Luke 8:27; Revelation 3:17; 16:15; 17:16). The only passages in which nudity is free of shame are those that describe Eden’s idyllic setting or that deal with marital relations (Proverbs 5:18-19; Song of Solomon 4).
Can a Christian be a nudist? What does the Bible say about nudity?

Click to expand...

Wearing a swimming costume is not naked.

I had some issues 13 years ago which I have overcome. I would not have gone swimming, I would feel bad about myself when sexual or nude things happened on TV. I was sensitive to it. Thankfully it was only for a couple of years and I lost the sensitivity. Now when I see music videos in the gym, for example, I see people, not naked body parts. All those years ago I saw sonething that made me feel terrible. I saw bad media, portraying sexual images.

I actually feel very happy in a swimming costume now. It feels normal. I feel dressed for the occasion and if I bumped into my pastor I would feel no shame.

I would feel happy in myself wearing a bikini. If I bumped into my Pastor I think I would feel a bit shamed because I know I could have made a more modest choice.

I can feel fully dressed in a costume but immodest in church fully dressed but in a top with the holes cut out at the shoulders which are fashionable at the moment. I bought two tops like that after liking the trend on other women. I evaluate my clothes regularly and refrain from buying so many things incase they are enticing. Well to my horror, I took my coat of and felt the exposed skin and immodest. Had to put my coat on for sake of conscience and overheat for the service. Place and intent has a lot to do with what is modest.

However, consider a women, who grew up wearing bikinis as a child because her parents bought them. Say she dressed regularly like that and is now a beautiful 18 year old woman. Why would she suddenly turn around and feel naked in the same style attire her own mother and father thought acceptable? She did not grow up wearing it so boys would fancy her. She wore it because she was taught it was proper attire to wear in that place. She could be thoroughly innocent and a man could be blaming her and hating her for being immodest. That would be a small travesty.

Sam91 said:

Wearing a swimming costume is not naked.

I had some issues 13 years ago which I have overcome. I would not have gone swimming, I would feel bad about myself when sexual or nude things happened on TV. I was sensitive to it. Thankfully it was only for a couple of years and I grew less sensitive. Now when I see music videos in the gym, for example, I see people. All those years ago I saw sonething that made me feel terrible. I saw bad media, portraying sexual images.

I actually feel very happy in a swimming costume now. It feels normal. I feel dressed for the occasion and if I bumped into my pastor I would feel no shame.

I would feel happy in myself wearing a bikini. If I bumped into my Pastor I think I would feel a bit shamed because I know I could have made a more modest choice.

However, a women, who grew up wearing bikini's as a child because their parents bought them. Who has never gone through any issues. Say she dressed regularly like that and is now a beautiful 18 year old woman. Why would she suddenly turn around and feel naked in the same style attire her own mother and father thought acceptable? She did not grow up wearing it so boys would fancy her. She wore it because she was taught it was proper attire to wear in that place. She could be thoroughly innocent and a man is blaming her and hating her for deliberately being immodest. That is also a small travesty.

Click to expand...

If you were wearing a bikini at the pool and bumped into my pastor you would not feel even slightly ashamed—she would probably be wearing one too!

Archivist said:

If you were wearing a bikini at the pool and bumped into my pastor you would not feel even slightly ashamed—she would probably be wearing one too!

Click to expand...

Haha!!

Guess it depends on the Pastor. Mine makes me feel like a schoolkid. No fault of his, it is just the way I react to him. He is a lovely man, I just view him like a head teacher/principal.