- Jun 13, 2002
- 21,696
- 1,466
- 71
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Charismatic
- Marital Status
- Single
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Thank you diddydidaskalos said:I am sorry someone treated you so unkindly sister.
You are always sweet and kind... which is the best clothing of all!
AlabamaMan said:Henhouse, I am glad you posted. Thanks for giving me a verse to back up your position. I thought that would be the verse that some would use and I tend to agree with Quaffer, their were robes for men and their were robes for women. Their are pants for men and their are pants for women.
I tend to think that verse you quoted was more for cross dressing folks...those who dress to look like a woman or vice versa. MHO.
Henhouse said:To me, the ideal in woman's modesty (in western society, anyway) is 'long' 'loose' dress or skirt, 'non-revealing' top, and head covering of some sort.
Henhouse said:Oh, just wanted to add that I don't think we ought to be legalistic about it, saying "all Christian women must wear skirts at least 4 inches past the knee, hemline being at least twice the waistline, in the style of the early American pioneers, only in light pink or yellow, no zippers, etc."
And I would never doubt a woman's salvation because she didn't wear a modest dress/skirt, or deny her entrance to a church building or anything like that.
I just think as a woman grows in her walk with the Lord, and reads scripture (esp. 1Tm 2, 1Pt 3, and Titus 2) she will have a greater desire to please the Lord in her dress. This may manifest itself in many ways, but I would think in general the change would be towards 'modesty' (in what degree, and from what stage to what stage will depend on the woman and her situation). To me, the ideal in woman's modesty (in western society, anyway) is 'long' 'loose' dress or skirt, 'non-revealing' top, and head covering of some sort. But you see that even in that narrow ideal there is still a lot of room for interpretation. Every few months I will put on clothing that I had no problem wearing just recently, and find it is now 'immodest' to me. It's a process, and there cannot be an absolute definition without losing the freedom, rule of Spirit, and personal conscience.
i agree. i think all dress prohibitions per se are about modesty and not being a stumbling block. are we allowed to french braid our hair? yes. are we allowed to dress like prost*tutes? no. in that day, how did prost*tutes dress? braided hair and elegance. now? they dress cheaply and sexily. same principle, applies differently in different eras.Heinrich said:1 Timothy 2:8-9 NKJV
"I desire therefore that the men pray everywhere, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting; in like manner also that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly things"
Accept for this saying that lifting up hands is biblical
This says a few things I guess commenly misunderstood.
Why did Paul write this? What is the reason for this? "in like manner" == has something todo with holyness.
Lets just think for a moment here. What could be wrong with a women walking around in a bikini in church? Well accept that she might get a cold, it would GREATLY DISTRACT THE MEN!!! yes people Paul talks about the lust of the eyes! Just like in Pauls time there are today many many men that struggle with lust that are in the church. Many men come out of porn addiction affairs and all sorts of messed up things. We don't need girls running around in clothing that says: Look at me! ect. ect.
What is wrong with women wearing pants? well I guess it depends on the cut.
What is wrong with women wearing shirts? well I guess it depends on the length.
I hope this makes sense
LynneClomina said:i agree. i think all dress prohibitions per se are about modesty and not being a stumbling block. are we allowed to french braid our hair? yes. are we allowed to dress like prost*tutes? no. in that day, how did prost*tutes dress? braided hair and elegance. now? they dress cheaply and sexily. same principle, applies differently in different eras.
Jim B said:Yes Lynne, but most Charismatic preachers dress like Mafia hit men - Versace suits, Mezlan loafers, Italian silk ties and French shirts.
\o/
Jim B said:Yes Lynne, but most Charismatic preachers dress like Mafia hit men - Versace suits, Mezlan loafers, Italian silk ties and French shirts.
\o/
LynneClomina said:i think what you wrote here is really beautiful. i kinda feel the same way about modesty being a process... yet i do not believe in dresses only or head coverings and stuff... i wear jeans and stuff, and just try to look like a woman and not a man, and not be a stumbling block in any sexual way to anybody. i wear a tank top under my sweaters because these days, they are just a little too low in the neckline. i try to never let any skin in any untoward places show. in the summer when i wear shorts, they are usually below the knee, but if i *could* i would wear them just above the knee, but not much shorter than that. i think its all covered in Jesus' commandments to love Him and love others as yourself...
i also think that because we are in the world, we should "blend" somewhat with the world, not dress in such a way as to alienate those we are trying to reach out to. we are not of the world yes, but that refers more to our make-up, ie. who we are in principles, beliefs, where they originate, what we are born "of" (spirit).... and yet we are in the world, which implies to me that we are not obviousely different...
i find it interesting that when convents first started up around 1000 years ago give or take, they studiously dresses as the common folk did... then they never changed the style of dress, and it became a uniform.... the "habit" was originally intended to help people blend in, not stand out like it does today!!!
I was just joking Lynne (sort of). I know their is immodest dress which includes gold, etc., according to 1 Timothy. Just so I know where this discussion is going, would, say, Dino (the pianist, not the dinosaur) be considered immodest by his Liberace-like appearance?LynneClomina said:oh, and i was talking about how prost*tutes dress, i am not saying that ppl CAN'T be immodest by dressing *rich*. when its showing off ANYTHING, its immodest.
Jim B said:I was just joking Lynne (sort of). I know their is immodest dress which includes gold, etc., according to 1 Timothy. Just so I know where this discussion is going, would, say, Dino (the pianist, not the dinosaur) be considered immodest by his Liberace-like appearance?
\o/
Because it is preachers dressed like Mafioso that impose dress codes on women using as their argument that women should not dress "like the world." Sort of hypocritical, dontcha think?LynneClomina said:yes, and i frankly think they are hypocrites, and not living right anyways. i do not "watch" charismatic preachers. i dont think they are right.
but what does preachers dressing like hitmen have to do with women's clothes?
It doesn't matter Lynne. Knowing who he is probably wouldn't add much to your life anyhow!LynneClomina said:oh, ok, JimB.good to know. but i have a question.
Dino, who?
seriously, i dont know who that is.
Lynne
Jim B said:Because it is preachers dressed like Mafioso that impose dress codes on women using as their argument that women should not dress "like the world." Sort of hypocritical, dontcha think?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?