More on Skirts

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

I guess I don't see it as you do. Not sure what's wrong with leopard print. I certainly don't view it as something sexual.

Leopard print has a reputation.

Here are a couple articles that mention it (there are plenty of others):

https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/...-leopard-print

https://quantumbiologist.wordpress.c...leopard-print/

Most Apostolics aren't well versed with fashion history beyond the standards. I've seen Pastor's wives wearing chokers at conference... um... do they know what message their sending with their chosen styles? lol

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Just wondering who wears $800 suits?

It would be nice. lol

Probably quacks like Osteen.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

Neckline is too low. She bends down to do something or leans over and people will be given a show.


The cut of the jackets in these two photos are the same as the Pentecostal lady you said was inappropriate. The difference in them is the pose. These women are standing straight, the other is arching back in her photos, causing the jacket to appear ill-fitted. Were she standing normally, as the other two, the jacket would look the same.

Good point. I didn't think about the bending over thing. I can see the neckline being higher as an improvement as it relates to modesty.

But this caused a question in my head, if one would give a show by bending over, and the one woman's jacket gives curvature by arching her back... are they both immodest?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

With exception of most of her skirts being well above her knees, she looks mostly modest.

Some of her outfits, like I said, have made me wonder. But for the most part, even in a women's pants suit, Sarah Palin is mostly modest in my opinion.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Good point. I didn't think about the bending over thing. I can see the neckline being higher as an improvement as it relates to modesty.

But this caused a question in my head, if one would give a show by bending over, and the one woman's jacket gives curvature by arching her back... are they both immodest?

I don't want to judge the sister. The pose doesn't look comfortable, IMO. I very much doubt she intended it to look immodest. She can't help the pose showed certain things being accentuated. That's about as proper as I can post about that.

[Aquila]

What is also interesting is that we jump at the word, "abomination". We like to say that if something is an abomination, it's especially detestable or worse than other sins. However, biblically speaking, all sin is an abomination to God. For example, here is a list of what the Bible calls an "abomination":

•Unclean things (Lev. 7:21)
•Customs of pagans (Lev. 18:30)
•Idols (2 Chr. 15:8; 1 Pet. 4:3)
•Sins of men (Ps. 14:1; 53:1)
•Cheating (Mic. 6:10)
•Lost souls (Rev. 21:8)
•A froward man (perverse; one who turns aside (Pro. 3:32; 11:20)
•A proud look (Pro. 6:16-17)
•A lying tongue (Pro. 6:17; 12:22)
•Hands that shed innocent blood ((Pro. 6:17)
•A wicked scheming heart (Pro. 6:18)
•Feet that are quick to sin (Pro. 6:18)
•A false witness that speaks lies (Pro. 6:19)
•A sower of discord (Pro. 6:19)
•Wickedness (Pro. 8:7)
•A false balance or scale (Pro. 11:1)
•Sacrifices of the wicked (Pro. 15:8; 21:27)
•The way of the wicked (Pro. 15:9)
•The thoughts of the wicked (Pro. 15:26)
•The proud of heart (Pro. 16:5)
•Justifying the wicked (Pro. 17:15)
•Condemning the just (Pro. 17:15)
•Divers, dishonest weights (Pro. 20:10, 23)
•Divers, dishonest measures (Pro. 20:10)
•Refusing to hear the law (Pro. 28:9)
•Prayers of the rebel (Pro. 28:9)
•Eating flesh of peace offerings on the 3rd day (Lev. 7:18)
•Same sex acts (Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Dt. 23:18)
•Taking ornaments from idols when being destroyed (Dt. 7:25-26)
•Any Idolatrous practices (Dt. 12:31; 13:14; 17:4; 18:9; 20:18; 29:17)
•Offering an imperfect animal to God as a sacrifice (Dt. 17:1)
•Any traffic with demons (Dt. 18:7-12)
•Wearing clothes of the opposite sex (Dt. 22:5)
•Bringing the hire of a harlot or sodomite into God's house (Dt. 23:18)
•Re-marriage of former companions (Dt. 24:1-4)
•Cheating others (Dt. 25:13-16)
•Making images/idols (Dt. 27:15)
•Idols of Ammon (1 Ki. 11:5)
•Idols of Moab (1 Ki. 11:7; 2 Ki. 11:13)
•Idols of Zidon (2 Ki. 23:13)
•Incense offered by hypocrites (Isa. 1:13)
•Eating unclean things (Isa. 66:17)
•Offering human sacrifices (Jer. 32:35)
•Robbery (Ezek. 18: 6-13)
•Murder (Ezek. 18: 6-13)
•Adultery (Ezek. 18: 6-13)
•Oppression of others, particularly the poor or vulnerable (Ezek. 18: 6-13)
•Violence (Ezek. 18: 6-13)
•Breaking vows (Ezek. 18: 6-13)
•Lending with interest to a brother (Ezek. 18: 6-13)
•Lying with a menstruous woman (Ezek. 18: 6-13)
•Hardness of heart (Ezek. 18: 6-13)
•Injustice (Ezek. 18: 6-13)
•Worship of anti-Christ (Dan. 11:31; 12:11; Mt. 24:15; 2 Th. 2:4; Rev. 13)
•Incest (Lev. 19: 6-30)
•Things highly esteemed by man (Lk. 16:15)
•Many other sins of the nations (Lev. 18: 26-29; Dt. 18: 9-12; 20:18; 29:17; 1 Ki. 14:24; 21:2, 11; 23:24; 2 Chr. 28:3; 33:2; 34:33; 36:14; Ezek. 7: 3-20; 8: 6-17; 16: 2-58; 20: 4-30; Rev. 17: 4-5)

I'm of the opinion that essentially no sin is worse than any another. This affirms not only God's absolute Holiness, but it also affirms the depth and richness of His grace and mercy. However, the there is one that is an unforgiveable sin. Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven in this world or in the world to come. For it strikes at the very essence of God.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Leopard print has a reputation.

Here are a couple articles that mention it (there are plenty of others):

https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/...-leopard-print

https://quantumbiologist.wordpress.c...leopard-print/

Most Apostolics aren't well versed with fashion history beyond the standards. I've seen Pastor's wives wearing chokers at conference... um... do they know what message their sending with their chosen styles? lol

Honestly never considered leopard print as something sexual. Must be like the color red. People claimed that was the color choice of certain women.

Chokers? At a UPC conference?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

Honestly never considered leopard print as something sexual. Must be like the color red. People claimed that was the color choice of certain women.

Chokers? At a UPC conference?

Yep. I've had two pastors whose wives wore chokers. Some sisters will take a small scarf and essentially tie it around their neck. However some fold these in such a way that the width and effect is essentially "choker like" and the knot is smaller, and further back to the side. A "Pentecostal choker" if you will.

When it comes to chokers and leopard print, my wife only wore them in private.

[Aquila]

Frankly, in Pentecost... I've seen dresses, blouses, and skirts becoming tighter. Bedroom prints becoming popular. Chokers being worn on the platform. Stiletto heels being worn on the platform. Their long hair is often styled with bedroom curls dangling in the face... and I could go on, but I wont.

Sadly, a group of hipster Christians gathered in a house church is often more modest than the women of the UPCI even though most girls are wearing pants, have styled hair, and some jewelry. For example, here's a book cover featuring Hipster Christians. Most are more modest than what I saw at church last, with the exception of two. Two ladies are on the borderline of what I'd call modest....

http://image.slidesharecdn.com/hipst...?cb=1357138077

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Yep. I've had two pastors whose wives wore chokers. Some sisters will take a small scarf and essentially tie it around their neck. However some fold these in such a way that the width and effect is essentially "choker like" and the knot is smaller, and further back to the side. A "Pentecostal choker" if you will.

Ah. I haven't seen those around here. Then again, except for the service I attended a couple weeks ago, I haven't been to a UPC event in a decade or so.

Originally Posted by Aquila

When it comes to chokers and leopard print, my wife only wore them in private.

TMI!