Defining Modesty

[ViaCrucis]

Someone could be wearing something quite revealing and still be modest.
Someone could be covering up completely and still be immodest.

Modesty is culturally defined and circumstantial; and usually has far more to do with intent than anything else.

Frankly, I think we immediately step into error the moment we start to judge other people by the way they look and trying to define what is and isn't "modest"; which almost always results in finding ways to play the moral busybody and the self-righteous hypocrite.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Hillsage]

I wasn't interested in 'arguing these points'. But I did find your answer interesting enough to even give you an 'informative' rating. But whether it is true or not, it's really not a point worth arguing about anyway IMO.

With 'your explanation, I now hope my 'bolding' didn't make it sound like I took any kind of offense, to promt an apology. I do appreciate your explanation though, and agree with your position concerning provability.

 

[Dave-W]

It is highly unlikely that God made leather garments miraculously. He stopped creating on the 7th day.

Did He?

John 5:17
But He answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working.”

 

[AlexDTX]

Did He?

John 5:17
But He answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working.”

Still not going to waste my time.

 

[Sammy-San]

If a beautiful, well endowed,sexy looking woman were to sashay into the church in a tight red see through mini dress with a plunging neckline and a long split up both sides of this scrap of dress which exposed her thighs almost to her waist...
Even other women will double take and most of the men ( well the heterosexual ones at least) absolutely Will Not be able to focus on the sermon.

So modesty does depend on a person's beauty? To me that could be legalistic.