Preferences and not scripture?

[AbortMission]

I have been lurking around the conservative forum, and I have a potentially inflammatory theory I'd like some input on:

It seems to me that there is a very prevalent sentiment, that for something to be legitimate, it has to be justified by other means than coming from inside you. Preferably, it must come from God.

Specifically, I have the theory that general principles with scripture base is pushed as an excuse to justify unto oneself and manipulate peers into accepting one's own (traditional) preferences.

For instance, I read about the discussion of clothing and modesty in this sub-forum, and it struck me how not being sexually appealing was used as an argument against revealing potentially lust-inducing erogenous areas.

However, in real life, the antithesis to hotpants, drainpipes, tank tops is more formal dresses, and elegant dresscode. Women critising their (often younger) counterparts for dressing inappropriately, quite often choose accessories, blouses with textiles adapting to body contours like silk, rings, make-up, nylons (although wearing skirts extending beyond the knees).

Be honest with yourself and stop lying. If there was a point in not inducing lust, wouldn't you dress up in a cardboard box, or something awful-looking?

The vague distinction here, leaves me to believe that the real distinction between the liberal and the conservatives doesn't establish itself in understanding of scripture, but in preferences.

But because you can't argue with preferences to establish manipulative authority, you have to push pseudo-interpretations before you.

Discuss.

 

[A New Dawn]

The scriptures say that you should not be a stumbling block to someone who might be tempted by whatever the issue is. In this case, dressing modestly does not mean one has to purposely dress like an old school marm to accomplish this. One can dress modestly and nicely at the same time. There is a difference between looking nice and having everything covered, and looking like you are going out on the town partying with everything exposed (or close to it).

 

[sealacamp]

But because you can't argue with preferences to establish manipulative authority, you have to push pseudo-interpretations before you.

I don't know that anyone is trying to manipulate anyone else. The scriptures tell us to weigh all things against them therefore if anything does not balance itself against the scriptures then it must be inappropriate. That being the case since we follow Christ we must believe and follow His word as well. There is nothing manipulative in that. So I really don't understand your premise.

What I have seen by those that call themselves liberal Christians is a deviation away from Gods word. Perhaps I am mistaken but that is what I have seen in my life. That being the case it seems clear that following the Lord is not part of their belief. Rather their belief is to follow what ever they choose and then claim that the follow Christ when in reality they do not.

Sealacamp