We can only be responsible to follow the leading of God's Spirit regarding our own safeguards of modesty.
I answered your question with the answer above on post # 7. I wonder how she would feel reading some people's comments regarding her cleaveage! None of us our so holy and perfect that we should be bashing someone to the point of being offensive, especially when it was directed at a young Apostolic girl...Just my opinion.
By the way, am I a liberal or a conservative? I need to be sure to order the correct button to wear to church this Sunday.
You're not really answering either. Instead you are seeking to try to point fingers. I don't care about HER cleavage. I am trying to discuss clothing and how far you people go. You people would rather just make it personal though and avoid the hard questions. I didn't bash her. I did not condemn her. I did not judge her. I didn't ask about HER. I asked you people where do YOU draw the line.
BTW she is not a girl. She is a woman.
It's very telling to me that you all want to use clothing as an issue to beat each other up over and yet not come to any concrete ideas of what you personally believe is appropriate attire for dressing. I did not ask what you think how SHE should be dressing.
__________________ Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:
There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
Every sinner must repent of their sins.
That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
I noticed this too . . . though to be fair it went from low necklines to speedos, then to being in a nudest colony.
Talk about a slippery slope!
Actually a slipperly slope is where someone says "if you have low necklines now, that will lead to nudest colonies" and I did not do that. I asked where you guys draw the line and you have all done your best to avoid answering and instead attempt to make this personal and with false accusations. I find it ironic to hear the liberals go on and on about the conservatives when the liberals are just as mean spirited and angry and judgemental as the cons.
__________________ Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:
There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
Every sinner must repent of their sins.
That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
I draw the line at modesty, pure and simple!! If I put on something that is immodest, the Holy Ghost in me automatically lets me know that I can't wear it. It's pretty simple, but not a list of man made rules.
Yes, but I think everyone here is going to say they draw the line at modesty, but clearly they don't all agree on what modest is. That is why I am asking and nobody is capable or willing to answer. Is revealing cleavage immodest? Is a plunging neckline immodest? Are mini-skirts immodest? Nobody answers.
__________________ Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:
There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
Every sinner must repent of their sins.
That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
In my opinion, modesty is an individual thing - between the individual and God. I don't believe that God would not convinct someone if things were clearly visible that should not be. But I also don't believe that it is MY job to convict anyone. I can only be responsible for MY OWN actions.
We had a discussion one night at Bible Study. Our pastor was explaining that he believed that necklaces are wrong because when a guy looks at a woman with a necklace on, his eyes are 'naturally drawn' to the necklace which is usually either lying on her chest or right above it. His eyes then would tend to gravitate downward where they don't belong.
My answer to that was that when a guy wears a fancy belt buckle, a woman's eyes don't 'naturally gravitate downward'.
So the reality of the matter is that if you sin (lust) because of a what a person is wearing, you are the one who is responsible for you. Not the person you are looking at.
That does NOT give free reign to people to walk around naked. NO WAY. But it does put the responsibility where the responsiblity belongs. The person wearing no clothes is responsible to answer for that. But the person reacting to the provocative clothing is responsible for their own reaction.
Why not? It is 100% between them and God according to you and others. Since God doesn't establish consistent lines of modesty for us as individuals you cannot say that nudity is not the modest line God drew for that individual. If you have a problem with their nudity it is you that has the problem not them. That IS what you said above.
Funny thing about necklines....they are only too low if cleavage is showing!
For those of you with no imagination, there are some of us with cleavage that starts at the neck, and some don't have any at all, yet what works for one won't work for the other.
I wear what is modest for me. May not be modest for someone else, but I'm not responsible for what they wear.
Right, see I did not ask you guys where do you think someone else should draw the line. I asked where do YOU draw the line.
__________________ Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:
There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
Every sinner must repent of their sins.
That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
I agree.....what I consider to be holy Suzy across the church may think differently. I won't judge you if you won't judge me.
My personal convictions are:
Skirts to cover the knee
Sleeves to at least cover the shoulder and not show the arm pit
Necline to be high enough to not show cleavage
Clothes not be too tight as to reveal what is underneath
Not sure what all you want to know........
Thank you! You are the ONLY person here that answered.
__________________ Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:
There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
Every sinner must repent of their sins.
That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
In my opinion, modesty is an individual thing - between the individual and God. I don't believe that God would not convinct someone if things were clearly visible that should not be. But I also don't believe that it is MY job to convict anyone. I can only be responsible for MY OWN actions.
We had a discussion one night at Bible Study. Our pastor was explaining that he believed that necklaces are wrong because when a guy looks at a woman with a necklace on, his eyes are 'naturally drawn' to the necklace which is usually either lying on her chest or right above it. His eyes then would tend to gravitate downward where they don't belong.
My answer to that was that when a guy wears a fancy belt buckle, a woman's eyes don't 'naturally gravitate downward'.
So the reality of the matter is that if you sin (lust) because of a what a person is wearing, you are the one who is responsible for you. Not the person you are looking at.
That does NOT give free reign to people to walk around naked. NO WAY. But it does put the responsibility where the responsiblity belongs. The person wearing no clothes is responsible to answer for that. But the person reacting to the provocative clothing is responsible for their own reaction.
Is there a reason why neckties 'point' instead of squaring off at the bottom?
Did I say that?
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
Linear Mode
