Could You Spot Jezebel in Your Church?

[SDG]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Hmmm. I don't know that I agree. Adam and Eve were pure and naked. In their most pure state, they had no clothes on at all.

No, I think holiness is a state God induces upon our hearts, and modesty is an expression of courtesy and concern for others, a symptom of more maturity, but not necessarily more holiness.

You need to start your own mega-church ... maybe you can have Matt in a backroom crunching numbers.

[StillStanding]

Originally Posted by DividedThigh

hasnt she always, hey isnt it golf day for you my friend, lol,dt

Yep! I had to mow the yard first! I'll be teeing off around 2:00PM!

[Sister Alvear]

if clotes were all there were to holiness the nuns are far more holy than most of us...my dear ones, if you meet a person that is holy You will know it.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

You need to start your own mega-church ... maybe you can have Matt in a backroom crunching numbers.

eh?

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

if clotes were all there were to holiness the nuns are far more holy than most of us...my dear ones, if you meet a person that is holy You will know it.

Very true, and I've met holy people who didn't necessarily line up to my personal standard of appropriate dress, and unholy people who exceeded it.

I really think that appropriate, modest dress and "holiness" are totally separate issues, and when we try to make them equal or related, we run into all kinds of theological problems.

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Hmmm. I don't know that I agree. Adam and Eve were pure and naked. In their most pure state, they had no clothes on at all.

No, I think holiness is a state God induces upon our hearts, and modesty is an expression of courtesy and concern for others, a symptom of more maturity, but not necessarily more holiness.

In their most pure state they were blind to their nakedness. But as soon as they saw, they attempted to hide and cover up. So until you are in the same state they were in prior to the fall, and are totally blind to fleshly things, I would say that it is best to cover up.


And I do not think anyone has stated that the more holy you are, the more modest you get. But I do not believe a person can have Gods holiness, and not be modest in their lifestyle.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

In their most pure state they were blind to their nakedness. But as soon as they saw, they attempted to hide and cover up. So until you are in the same state they were in prior to the fall, and are totally blind to fleshly things, I would say that it is best to cover up.


And I do not think anyone has stated that the more holy you are, the more modest you get. But I do not believe a person can have Gods holiness, and not be modest in their lifestyle.

Your last paragraph is contradictory. You state that you don't believe that more modesty = more holiness or vice versa, but then you said...you can't be holy and not be modest.

Modest by whose standard? That's the problem. We go around trying to decide whether folks are "Christian" enough based on how they dress. It's a problem. And then use our conclusions to decide all sorts of things, including (but not limited to) whether or not we show love to them, or whether or not we fellowship with them. (And they are our brothers and sisters in Christ whether we like it or not.)

Jesus said that we will show that we are HIS by how much we LOVE one another. Never once did He say we will show we are HIS by how "modestly" we dress. That's why I say they are separate issues.

I didn't say that modesty is a NON-issue. We teach our children modesty. But we don't tell them it's a sin to show skin. ...because it's not. And it's NOT a test of holiness, or even necessarily evidence of holiness.

[DividedThigh]

modesty is a must but different cultures do have different ideas of what modest is and isnt, some cultures in africa, cover all, and some cover half, who rules these god or the local preacher, huh, dt

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Very true, and I've met holy people who didn't necessarily line up to my personal standard of appropriate dress, and unholy people who exceeded it.

I really think that appropriate, modest dress and "holiness" are totally separate issues, and when we try to make them equal or related, we run into all kinds of theological problems.

Would you say sin and holiness are the opposites of each other? Can certain clothing be sinful in and of themselves? I don't think so, but depending on where you wear something and the reason you wear something, then you may be sinning by wearing those clothes. Even the clothes we wear should glorify God in some way.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

In their most pure state they were blind to their nakedness. But as soon as they saw, they attempted to hide and cover up. So until you are in the same state they were in prior to the fall, and are totally blind to fleshly things, I would say that it is best to cover up.


And I do not think anyone has stated that the more holy you are, the more modest you get. But I do not believe a person can have Gods holiness, and not be modest in their lifestyle.

I agree with you. Even if someone had on a psuedo show of Christian dress while the heart was stained, a woman still has to take 1Ti 2:9 seriously.

I Timothy 2:9 "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;"

"modest" is very instructive as it means to be "decorous" which goes as far as - The appropriateness of an element of an artistic or literary work, such as style or tone, to its particular circumstance or to the composition as a whole.

And being that apparel follows the word modest it is drawing this definition into the outward appearance. It is important to God. So yes, he looks on the heart. Your heart will show in your conduct AND your dress.