Serious Pants/ Skirts Question... Not Trying to Debate... Thanks!

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Barb

Let's try praying through...if there is a struggle with women, it is not the woman's fault, IMHO...

The right answer on dress lies somewhere betwixed the Taliban and the nudist colony. but praying through may lead away from both these extremes.

[BobDylan]

[QUOTE=philjones;241310]Bob,

I understand what you are asking and what you have just said regarding the culture of the past 30 years.

I guess my concern would be that this same Baptist preacher would also interpret as modest a woman parading around on a beach or at a pool in her bra and panties (called a swimsuit for some unknown reason). Can he continue to embrace that position and still be OK?[/QUOTE]

I don't necessarily agree with this slippery slope conclusion. The principle of modesty is replete in scripture, and most societies in general have a basic understanding of modesty and immodesty. It doesn't take a scholar to look at biblical customs and the society of the bible and determine what was considered modest and immodest at that time, and throughout most eras in most societies. The same cannot be said for "pants/skirts" being the absolute paradigm for what is women's and men's apparel. Revaluating something that is societal based (pants skirts), in light of something that isn't sociatal based (modesty), is comparing apples and oranges. There is no reason here, imo, to force-join these two issues (modesty and pants/skirts) in that each can be handled seperately on their own merits and biblical interpretation.

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by philjones

Esther,

They are indeed relative. I was also referring to the interpretation of a scripture, just not Deut. 22:5 or whereever it is?

I was speaking of the one that talks about modest apparel. I Tim 2:9. If he is comfortable interpreting one differently and is accepted then it would follow that he would have to be accepted with his interpretation of the other.

I will assure you that there are many OPs on this site that feel it is fine for ladies to run around on the beach in their bra and panties and still be saved. Of course these same folks would be embarrassed if I accidentally walked in on them getting dressed in their REAL bra and panties. Go figure.

I would only be comfortable interpreting something differently where there is a precedent of various interpretations. Pants/skirts, right now on earth today, has several different interpretations. For instance, there are apostolic churches on foreign mission fields where the men, WEAR SKIRTS, all the time, to play, to PREACH, etc... And in bible times, they had a completely different understanding of Deut 22:5...

Modesty is another issue. I however wouldn't have a problem with differnt interpretations of modesty... for instance some say "long sleeves" to the writs, others say "3/4 length", some say short sleeves are ok... others "sleeves to the finger tips". There are already different interpretations with regards to modesty, but lets not get into that discussion here, I am speaking only of pants/skirts.

[Newman]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Newman, you are always getting into the pants threads. LOL!

Seriously though, Kristin and I had the same reaction as you when reading the article. The writer did clarify the blame thing a bit, but only as a footnote!

I think I missed the footnote. The article reminded me of ILG as a new convert, walking around with bad posture lest someone be tempted. RIDICULOUS. I don't think its fair for our women to hear nonsense like this.

Before you know it; the young men at church aren't interested in the women at church who are dressed like their grandma. And the husbands at church aren't especially pleased with their wife's tent dresses either. It's really not a good thing to tell women (more or less) that it is wrong to be attractive.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Newman

I think I missed the footnote. The article reminded me of ILG as a new convert, walking around with bad posture lest someone be tempted. RIDICULOUS. I don't think its fair for our women to hear nonsense like this.

Here it is. It should at least have been included in the article.



Footnotes

1. I am not blaming the way women dress as the cause of men being addicted to pornography. Every man is responsible to God for his addiction and cannot lay blame on others. However, as women of God, we must be responsible to God for how we dress so we do not compound the problem for men who want to be overcomers!

[Newman]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Here it is. It should at least have been included in the article.

Footnotes

1. I am not blaming the way women dress as the cause of men being addicted to pornography. Every man is responsible to God for his addiction and cannot lay blame on others. However, as women of God, we must be responsible to God for how we dress so we do not compound the problem for men who want to be overcomers!

SH- Not good enough.

1. She isn't blaming the woman for his initial problem but rather his continuing problem.

2. Furthermore, the article was directed at women in the church who do not look like "worldly" women to begin with.

3. It should not be a crime to be attractive nor to dress differently than grandma. Christian women should not have to hide behind tent dresses.

4. As I mentioned before; the church should have lots of visiting women any way. It is up to the man to gain control in his life.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Newman

SH- Not good enough.

1. She isn't blaming the woman for his initial problem but rather his continuing problem.

2. Furthermore, the article was directed at women in the church who do not look like "worldly" women to begin with.

3. It should not be a crime to be attractive nor to dress differently than grandma. Christian women should not have to hide behind tent dresses.

4. As I mentioned before; the church should have lots of visiting women any way. It is up to the man to gain control in his life.

In general, I think we agree.

There was much in the article though that was good too. (besides the point we are contending)

[Newman]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

In general, I think we agree.

There was much in the article though that was good too. (besides the point we are contending)

I was too surprised to see ninety and nine run the article. I failed to notice the good points. Care to elaborate?

[Newman]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Newman, you are always getting into the pants threads. LOL!

Umm... I wouldn't have to if someone else would bring up the point about the cross-dressing/temple prostitution that was going on at the time in the neigboring land.

Originally Posted by Newman

pj-

1. Women who wear 2 piece bathing suits aren't the majority. But 99.9% of women wear pants. So the argument seems flawed to start with and then extreme (which muddies the water).

2. I am tired of women in the church being accused or warned against dressing loosely for the sake of their brother. Loosely compared to whom?

I am focusing on this point because of a Ninety and Nine article in which the women of the church are again admonished to not be a temptation to their brother [who was involved in porn].

The brother asked why he must struggle at church just like outside its doors. Good grief. The women at church are not dressed like magazine covers nor would the majority of the world consider them to be seductive.

Furthermore; if the Church is out there doing God's business there should be quite a few women visitors there who aren't dressed like the church!

CJ is right. The men need to grow up and quit picking on the church women. Then you all wonder why so many end up fat?

Newman,

Two things...

1. Your very first statement is the least intelligent thing I have ever seen you put in a post. When I read it to my wife who is not Apostolic she wanted to know what planet you were living on. In her estimate the percentage of two piece bathing suits is equal to your percentage of pants. She went on to say that probably 60% of the 99.9% that are two pieces are bikinis. Trust me... she is a beachaholic and she would know.

2. You misconstrued my comments to get on your soapbox about the abuse of women and their responsibility to their brother or lack thereof. I made it clear that I believe it is my responsibility to guard my eyes but that does NOT relieve women from their responsibility to be modest. Modesty is not for me or you it is for the individual living a modest lifestyle.

Now rant away... I have no bone to pick with you or anyone else.... especially the poor abused Pentecostal women! I enjoyed the joke!