How do you feel about women not wearing bras? Is it a Sin?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Endtime Survivors

prophecy link in my profile!
Apr 4, 2016
1,394
458
Africa
Visit site
✟30,738.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
No, her motives are irrelevant.

I suppose this is where the crux of the issue is (at least, for me).

It seems to me there is a strong sense of justice being argued here. No one wants to be blamed for the behavior of others. If a woman goes bra-less and a man lusts, it's hardly fair to blame the woman.

I understand your desire to maintain this sense of justice. To some degree, it's fair, but it is this issue of "degrees" where we find our disagreement. I am suggesting the issue cannot accurately (or justly) be defined by an "either/or" position (i.e. either it's the woman's fault or the man's fault).

This is why an examination of motives is so important. Perhaps we have different understandings of what "motive" means. I understand it to mean "the reason why we behave the way we do".

If we stop examining the reasons for why we (or others) behave the way we do, then what do we have? Without reason, we have mindlessness. I don't believe that's something you genuinely support. So, when you say, "the motivation is irrelevant" it comes across more so as a convenient way to sidestep accountability rather than a reasoned position. After all, how can you have a reasoned position when you've already said the reasoning behind the behavior is irrelevant?

On what basis do you decide when motivations should be irrelevant?

Even IF there was no man to take offense, the motivation behind the way she behaves (including how she chooses to dress) would still be important to God. As a result of free will, we have a lot of freedom, even to the point that we can say "no" to the most powerful entity in existence. Of course every, single, tiny little detail as to why we make the choices we do will be incredibly important to God. None of our behavior is irrelevant to him, so why should it be irrelevant to us?

That's the point of integrity; it shouldn't matter if no one is there to complain; we should still behave according to motives (or reasons) which are consistent with what God wants.

Maybe God will have no problem with the bra-less woman, but we (or she) can't know that unless her motivations are examined.

Maybe God will have no problem with me suddenly taking the day off, but unless I carefully examine my motives, I won't really know if it's because I genuinely need the rest or because I'm being lazy, regardless of anyone around me who may, or may not, take offense.

Even BukiRob hinted at the concept of drawing a line somewhere; he suggested that line should be at lasciviousness. He didn't define his understanding of lascivious behavior but at least he had some idea of a situation where it could be appropriate to object.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Mccleary
Upvote 0

Endtime Survivors

prophecy link in my profile!
Apr 4, 2016
1,394
458
Africa
Visit site
✟30,738.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
You've got screws loose if you define a woman choosing not to wear a bra is dressing lasciviously.

I did not propose such a definition. I've been saying from the start that an assessment should be made on a case-by-case basis, and it should be done on the basis of context and reason, including a chance for everyone to have their say. I've never suggested that blame should be laid on any particular person in any of the suggested scenarios, except in situations where the motive is wrong, but, again, we can't know that without examining the motive, and that is part of the process of exercising context and reason.

Something is stopping you from hearing the good sense in my suggestions and I suspect it's some kind of fear or insecurity? I get the feeling that you're pretty used to arguing with stubborn people and you've got this idea that if you let up on your position even a teensy, tiny bit, that doing so somehow equates to you losing the fight or whatever.

But, a genuine consideration of what the other person is saying does not constitute forsaking your own position, though I'm aware that this kind of "bait and switch" argument is pretty common on forums.

I believe I have heard and understood your position. I am suggesting that there is more to the issue worth exploring. This does not equate to you being wrong or me being right. It's just an expansion of the issue to include information which could make a difference from one case to the next; that not all cases are the same nor should they be treated as the same.

On that note, you're the one who brought up the caveat of "clearly lascivious" as being the point a which you might object to how a person dresses. I'm curious what your understanding of lascivious would be, in practical terms. How would a man or a woman need to dress, or what would the context need to be before you'd consider it to be lascivious?
 
Upvote 0

Zoii

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2016
5,811
3,982
23
Australia
✟103,785.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
So ...the topic and question is.... How do you feel about the act of women not wearing a bra at all? Are sometimes okay but not all the time? It just shouldn't be done? She has rights?
Just curious... but please, elaborate! I appreciate all view points!
Isnt their more intelligent things to discuss?
 
Upvote 0

Archivist

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Mar 5, 2004
17,332
6,425
Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
✟571,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I suppose this is where the crux of the issue is (at least, for me).

It seems to me there is a strong sense of justice being argued here. No one wants to be blamed for the behavior of others. If a woman goes bra-less and a man lusts, it's hardly fair to blame the woman.

I understand your desire to maintain this sense of justice. To some degree, it's fair, but it is this issue of "degrees" where we find our disagreement. I am suggesting the issue cannot accurately (or justly) be defined by an "either/or" position (i.e. either it's the woman's fault or the man's fault).

This is why an examination of motives is so important. Perhaps we have different understandings of what "motive" means. I understand it to mean "the reason why we behave the way we do".

If we stop examining the reasons for why we (or others) behave the way we do, then what do we have? Without reason, we have mindlessness. I don't believe that's something you genuinely support. So, when you say, "the motivation is irrelevant" it comes across more so as a convenient way to sidestep accountability rather than a reasoned position. After all, how can you have a reasoned position when you've already said the reasoning behind the behavior is irrelevant?

On what basis do you decide when motivations should be irrelevant?

Even IF there was no man to take offense, the motivation behind the way she behaves (including how she chooses to dress) would still be important to God. As a result of free will, we have a lot of freedom, even to the point that we can say "no" to the most powerful entity in existence. Of course every, single, tiny little detail as to why we make the choices we do will be incredibly important to God. None of our behavior is irrelevant to him, so why should it be irrelevant to us?

That's the point of integrity; it shouldn't matter if no one is there to complain; we should still behave according to motives (or reasons) which are consistent with what God wants.

Maybe God will have no problem with the bra-less woman, but we (or she) can't know that unless her motivations are examined.

Maybe God will have no problem with me suddenly taking the day off, but unless I carefully examine my motives, I won't really know if it's because I genuinely need the rest or because I'm being lazy, regardless of anyone around me who may, or may not, take offense.

Even BukiRob hinted at the concept of drawing a line somewhere; he suggested that line should be at lasciviousness. He didn't define his understanding of lascivious behavior but at least he had some idea of a situation where it could be appropriate to object.

There is really no sense in continuing this as long as you are going to ignore the questions that I have asked throughout the thread. How is it any different for a woman than for a man who goes without an undershirt? How is it different for someone who wears an expensive suit or drives an expensive car? Any of those can cause others to sin.

The responsibility lies with the man who is looking at the woman with lust, not with the woman who is not wearing a bra.

BTW, women who go without a bra probably don't have just one reason for doing so. Perhaps the woman doesn't like the feel of a bra. Perhaps she is concerned about health risks. And, yes, perhaps she thinks that she will attract some attention. It doesn't matter, the fault lies with the man who is lusting. And tell me, suppose a very attractive large-breasted woman is wearing a bra but men are still lusting because of her looks. Should she have to wear bulky sweaters? Perhaps a burqua? Where do we draw the line?
 
Upvote 0

Endtime Survivors

prophecy link in my profile!
Apr 4, 2016
1,394
458
Africa
Visit site
✟30,738.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
There is really no sense in continuing this as long as you are going to ignore the questions that I have asked throughout the thread.

Actually, I have addressed those concerns. I'm at the point now where I can't really continue without repeating myself which at this time doesn't seem to be bearing good fruit. Perhaps we'll find more to agree on in another topic. I look forward to that time.
 
Upvote 0

Archivist

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Mar 5, 2004
17,332
6,425
Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
✟571,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Actually, I have addressed those concerns. I'm at the point now where I can't really continue without repeating myself which at this time doesn't seem to be bearing good fruit. Perhaps we'll find more to agree on in another topic. I look forward to that time.

Actually no, you did not. For example, you never addressed my post 362, nor did you address the points raise in post 369. But we obviously need to just drop this.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

lunastella

only marginally interested
Supporter
Sep 7, 2010
58
43
✟51,187.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
So ...the topic and question is.... How do you feel about the act of women not wearing a bra at all? Are sometimes okay but not all the time? It just shouldn't be done? She has rights?
Just curious... but please, elaborate! I appreciate all view points!
If a woman wishes to wear a bra, she should be allowed. If a woman wishes not to wear a bra, she should not be forced.
 
Upvote 0

Kenny'sID

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 28, 2016
18,185
7,001
69
USA
✟585,304.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
No, it isn't. We know that Paul was fishing while naked, yet nothing in Scripture says that it was a sin for him to do so.

Scripture please.

This is off-topic in this thread. If you wish to offer proof in support of something that you incorrectly claim to be "so obvious" then you should start a new thread.

Cop out.

Or just mind you own business and don't look

Don't do it in public and make it my business and I won't look.

Absolutely none of which is on point in this thread.

Cop out #2.

Funny how people have no trouble with getting OT themselves, at least until claiming OT is not good, is useful to them due to agenda. ;)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Kenny'sID

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 28, 2016
18,185
7,001
69
USA
✟585,304.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
If it's ok to go nude, I wonder why God clothed the first humans in the Bible?

To me that act in itself says all it needs to yet someone will claims the Bible says nothing of Public nudity being wrong.

Seriously, sometimes a little common sense goes a long way, people.
 
Upvote 0

Archivist

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Mar 5, 2004
17,332
6,425
Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
✟571,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I believe the reference to fishing naked was actually Peter, as referenced in John 21:7.
Correct. Typo. My bad. Paul was a tent maker, not a fisherman.
 
Upvote 0

Archivist

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Mar 5, 2004
17,332
6,425
Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
✟571,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Scripture please.

Peter, not Paul. And the reference was already supplied by Paidiske.


No, this thread is about women not wearing bras. It has nothing to do with public nudity. It is not a "cop out" to point out that you are off topic.

Don't do it in public and make it my business and I won't look.

Women have every right to go without bras in public. If you choose to look and lust as a result that is your fault, not their fault.

Cop out #2.

No, once again you are the one going off topic. Start your own thread if you wish to discuss nudity.

Funny how people have no trouble with getting OT themselves, at least until claiming OT is not good, is useful to them due to agenda.

I know of no place where the OT reference wearing bras, so I'm certainly not "getting OT".
 
Upvote 0

Archivist

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Mar 5, 2004
17,332
6,425
Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
✟571,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
If it's ok to go nude, I wonder why God clothed the first humans in the Bible?

To me that act in itself says all it needs to yet someone will claims the Bible says nothing of Public nudity being wrong.

Seriously, sometimes a little common sense goes a long way, people.
But, again, this thread isn't about anyone going nude.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,128
19,006
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,533.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Ohhhh so now you're saying Peter should have been wearing a bra? This thread...

No, no, I was just answering someone else.

Although that would give a whole new meaning to "flirty fishing," wouldn't it?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: dayhiker
Upvote 0

Endtime Survivors

prophecy link in my profile!
Apr 4, 2016
1,394
458
Africa
Visit site
✟30,738.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
  • Haha
Reactions: dayhiker
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.