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

[Amos]

Originally Posted by Subdued

I guess all the poor, weak men have no responsibility to keep their hearts and minds pure. They just don't have it in them.

Wrong.

Men are absolutely responsible for their own lust, no matter what a women wears or doesn't wear.

Just like women are responsible for not dressing immodestly.

A man's responsibility for his own purity doesn't change a woman's obligation not to dress provocatively or in a revealing manner.

[Newman]

Originally Posted by Sarah

I find it extremely hard to believe that any Holy Ghost filled woman would disagree or become agitated with that article.

Jesus said if a man looks upon a woman and lusts after her, he has committed adultry already in his heart. Doesn't common sense, if not the spirit of God, tell us that we can do our part to see that that doesn't happen?

Most women know, in church and out, the affect they can have on men. And most of the time, we have it in our power to do something about it.

Sarah-

1. I will ignore the implication in your first point as to who has the Holy Ghost and who doesn't.

2. She is talking to church women who presumbaly are not wearing mini skirts, halters, low cut outfits, etc.

3. She is talking about men in to pornography. I would like to see the statistic that shows that a covered up woman would solve his problems. Isn't is likely that his next complaint (and continued failure to take responsibility for himself) would be that the women at church are too pretty or their hair catches his attention, or their shoes, etc.

4. They say that there is no such thing as an ugly woman on a ship with men. I would guess that guy with the pornography problem can't handle any young, pretty woman ministering on the platform no matter how she is dressed. Shall we put the men up front and the women in the back to solve this man's problems?

5. Why do we do we this to the women at church? How is it fair to suggest to them that they must dress in a way that brings the least attention because of the porn guy? Why are we surprised then when the young men are attracted to other women and husbands wish their wives were more attractive? Why are we surprised when women who have been taught to hide their bodies do so behind fat?

6. Why did the Ten Commandments tell us not to covet the other guy's stuff but didn't tell him to hide it?

7. For the record; I don't believe in immodesty. But I don't think Apostolic women with the Holy Ghost who are already dressed vastly different from what you find on the street and at your local supermarket need to be told that they need to take it down another notch because of some guy on porn.

8. I think young women should be told that how they dress will either attract or repel God fearing young men to them or from them. It can bring them good attention or bad attention. But it is ok to be attractive!

I think it WRONG to make women responsible for men who got into sin and now must work to overcome what they themselves created.

9. I believe dressing in a way that converys sexuality and one's willingness to engage in sex is lasciviousness, a work of the flesh (and still somewhat culturally dependent since there was a time when a woman's ankle would have been hot stuff!) Not sure that I have seen an Apostolic woman that could be mistaken for a prostitute though.

10. Jesus never suggested that the man ALONE wasn't responsible for his thoughts. He never talked to the women about how they dressed.

11. Peter and Paul spoke about modesty in an economic sense rather than how the church mostly looks at modesty today. They wanted to make sure that women understood their worth came from within, not without.

12. In fact, no where in the NT do we find a woman's dress as a cause for men's temptation (used as crutch for one's own sin). James wrote "But every man is tempted , when he is drawn away of his on lust, and enticed" (James 1:14).

We need to move way beyond the shallow teaching of rules and get to the core issues of the heart.

[Sarah]

Originally Posted by Barb

I agree that women have to maintain a sense of propriety. For Holy Ghost filled women, it should be a given.

But to blame women in the Church for a man's lustful eye is incorrect thinking.

"Do our part to see that this doesn't happen?!" For some men, it would happen if a woman was covered in burlap...it's the content of the heart where the problem lies.

Sister Barb, I don't blame women in the church for a man's lustful eye. If every woman in the church dresses immodest, it's still the man's duty to keep his own body under subjection.

I know that some men are going to lust after women, not matter what they wear, or what they look like. Like you say, it's the content of the heart.

That still doesn't absolve Holy Ghost filled women from not 'doing our part'. As you say, it's a given.

What did you think of the article?

Originally Posted by Esther

Yes, he can. That scripture was never about women wearing pants. We took it that way, because at the time UPC was formed MOST women wore dresses. HOWEVER, it is my opinion that scripture is talking about cross genders like the gays.

In other words, you dress to appear at the opposite sex. Never has been about women wearing pants.

Hope that helps.

Esther...You are Correct.
WE have a culture issue!
That is why most of the missionaries dont even deal with the whole pants thing on the field.
IF the culture overesees dictates a womans "pants", the missionaries usually do not force our interpretation of "partaineth to a man" on them.
And YES I do know this first hand!

Originally Posted by philjones

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?

Once again..a good question is trumped by a Con position showing an EXTREME case....try to answer the question with out extreme cases and with modesty on both parts and you have no argument.
For you to assume they would also agree with "bra and panties" is ignorant analogies.

[Subdued]

Originally Posted by Newman

Sarah-

1. I will ignore the implication in your first point as to who has the Holy Ghost and who doesn't.

2. She is talking to church women who presumbaly are not wearing mini skirts, halters, low cut outfits, etc.

3. She is talking about men in to pornography. I would like to see the statistic that shows that a covered up woman would solve his problems. Isn't is likely that his next complaint (and continued failure to take responsibility for himself) would be that the women at church are too pretty or their hair catches his attention, or their shoes, etc.

4. They say that there is no such thing as an ugly woman on a ship with men. I would guess that guy with the pornography problem can't handle any young, pretty woman ministering on the platform no matter how she is dressed. Shall we put the men up front and the women in the back to solve this man's problems?

5. Why do we do we this to the women at church? How is it fair to suggest to them that they must dress in a way that brings the least attention because of the porn guy? Why are we surprised then when the young men are attracted to other women and husbands wish their wives were more attractive? Why are we surprised when women who have been taught to hide their bodies do so behind fat?

6. Why did the Ten Commandments tell us not to covet the other guy's stuff but didn't tell him to hide it?

7. For the record; I don't believe in immodesty. But I don't think Apostolic women with the Holy Ghost who are already dressed vastly different from what you find on the street and at your local supermarket need to be told that they need to take it down another notch because of some guy on porn.

8. I think young women should be told that how they dress will either attract or repel God fearing young men to them or from them. It can bring them good attention or bad attention. But it is ok to be attractive!

I think it WRONG to make women responsible for men who got into sin and now must work to overcome what they themselves created.

9. I believe dressing in a way that converys sexuality and one's willingness to engage in sex is lasciviousness, a work of the flesh (and still somewhat culturally dependent since there was a time when a woman's ankle would have been hot stuff!) Not sure that I have seen an Apostolic woman that could be mistaken for a prostitute though.

10. Jesus never suggested that the man ALONE wasn't responsible for his thoughts. He never talked to the women about how they dressed.

11. Peter and Paul spoke about modesty in an economic sense rather than how the church mostly looks at modesty today. They wanted to make sure that women understood their worth came from within, not without.

12. In fact, no where in the NT do we find a woman's dress as a cause for men's temptation (used as crutch for one's own sin). James wrote "But every man is tempted , when he is drawn away of his on lust, and enticed" (James 1:14).

We need to move way beyond the shallow teaching of rules and get to the core issues of the heart.

Yeah, what she said!

[Newman]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Of Sex and Shamefacedness: Women—Beware!September 10, 2007

By Carol P. Clemans

.......


[A woman of God can be the victim of her husband’s sexual addictions. It destroys marriages and families. All women who love the Lord need to have a commitment with God not to be a source of sexual temptation in dress or actions. We need to teach our daughters (and peers) how to dress modestly and to respect themselves. This is the first step in sexual purity at all levels. (Suggested reading list below.)

Women, let each of us be strong in the Lord with our commitment to promote sexual purity through our appearance and conduct. God will bless our efforts with success.

Sarah- Can you find support in Scripture for what is said here?

1. Is it man's heart or woman's dress that is a source of temptation according to Scripture?

2. Is woman's dress and conduct the first step to sexual purity? Or is it a clean heart renewed by God?

3. Can women in church dressing a particular way fix the problem of the man into porn? If a woman dresses right and conducts herself right; is her husband ok? Will God then bless the efforts of the woman with success?

This is the uncut hair doctrine re-invinted (now with power through dressing modestly). I see flawed theology...

[Jack Shephard]

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?

I am trying to catch up on this thread, but this post got me. This is a good post. I think that alot of the pressure on the women by some pastors is a little much. Some pastors may do it as a form of control. I think that the reason is such a big deal to Op's is because they are not used to seeing a girl like that and it shocks them and becomes a tempting point. The fact is that if it were a norm for women to dress less like the 1920's and more like the 2000's then it would be so common it would not be an issue.

I am not saying that someone can dress like a hooker, but dressing like modest young person or modest adult but also dressed fasionable is ok. I have seen it before with some friends. It was very common for youth groups to "mix bath" and no temptations going on. Some of it is because the kids are like family, but it also comes from being used to seeing people like that. People may not agree with me, but I think that is why it is soooooo taboo in these ranks, it is not common.

[Barb]

Originally Posted by Sarah

Sister Barb, I don't blame women in the church for a man's lustful eye. If every woman in the church dresses immodest, it's still the man's duty to keep his own body under subjection.

I know that some men are going to lust after women, not matter what they wear, or what they look like. Like you say, it's the content of the heart.

That still doesn't absolve Holy Ghost filled women from not 'doing our part'. As you say, it's a given.

What did you think of the article?

I disagree with some of it, in particular, that women are not "visual in their natural attraction to men." That's silly...of course we are!!

She may not be made that way, but don't put everyone in the same box...

No, Sarah, I go back to what I said earlier...our position as Spirit filled women is to dress as becoming children of the Most High. Decency and modesty are attributes of the abiding Spirit, IMHO.

But for the writer to say that a praise singer who is into the song and worship and all that can't move a bit because it might entice an unsuspecting brother and cause him to entertain lustful thoughts...I don't buy it at all.

As Elder Amos said, the man is responsible for his OWN lust. Goodness!! I have enough to think about taking care of my own heart, let alone worrying about some silly man!!

[crakjak]

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.

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.

Knowledge is good, with understanding it is even better!!