When did the tradition of wearing your best....

[Justin]

Originally Posted by tbpew

Do you acknowledge the footnotes as a plurality of sources?

I don't have the book (yet). However, I am one to check references. So I will be looking.

[Whole Hearted]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

I'm not sure that dressing up made them better people, though. As I've dug into histories, I've been stunned by how much adultery, incest, pedophilia, drunkenness, etc. existed, and how much of it was covered up.

My husband prefers flannel shirts and jeans over suits, but he's a kind, decent, honorable man under those flannel shirts.

I think we should always look clean and presentable, and there's nothing wrong with following the cultural norms of dressing up, or dressing down. But we shouldn't idealize clothing styles, either.

I didn't say that clothes made better people.

i guess I am a product of my raisen. I just do not like this relaxed sloppy look of today.

[*AQuietPlace*]

Originally Posted by Whole Hearted

I didn't say that clothes made better people.

i guess I am a product of my raisen. I just do not like this relaxed sloppy look of today.

I don't care for sloppy, either. I think that dressing in a sloppy way can affect your attitude. When I go to the store in my sandals, I tend to slouch. When I wear my high-heeled boots, I stand tall and feel much more presentable. Our clothes do often affect our attitude.

[Digging4Truth]

Originally Posted by Justin

I don't have the book (yet). However, I am one to check references. So I will be looking.

It is an excellent book.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Justin

I don't have the book (yet). However, I am one to check references. So I will be looking.

It's a very interesting book. I was already on the journey when I read it. Church will never seem the same to me after reading it.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

I honestly don't see a deep conspiracy in this. It's just a custom. There have always been places we go where we 'dress up' more than others, according to our customs. Fancy restaurants, state dinners, the prom, to visit the president, funerals, weddings, some work environments... everything has different levels of dress code according to custom. Church has traditionally been one of those places where, like a nice restaurant, we tend to dress up more than if we were going to a ball game. It's just custom.

Custom has been changing lately (as it always does), and the trend has been toward less dressing up for church (and other places). That's fine, too, in my opinion.

Fashion, style and custom is an always changing thing. 60 years ago men wore suits most of the time, for everything. Women apparently cleaned house in pearls and high heels. The Victorian age was extremely dressy, as opposed to very early times when everyone wore robes and sandals. It's just custom, it changes.

I believe that worship is a practice of the home and family. While I value being presentable and even dressed a bit “up” at times, I don’t think it should be a point of contention. If someone wishes to attend a church dressed casually or to preach dressed casually, why not? Early Christians were very poor and didn’t dress up for their worship. They met in homes dressed in daily attire, worshipped the Lord, and ministered to one another.

I can understand dressing up to see a show. But worship is intimate and expresses one’s daily walk with God. The church I first attended stressed dressing up to the point where I felt uncomfortable in casuals when attending prayer services. Much stress was placed on appearance.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by TJJJ

Oh goodness gracious!

Some of you are so afraid of being labeled traditional that you create a new one! Traditional Nontraditionalist!

Not everything is wrong just because it is tradition.

We have Traditional dress on Sunday Morn, suits ties etc. We have many ex-catholics and they like dressing up. Just tradition.

Wednesday night is casual.

Nobody is going to hell if the wear casual on Sunday Morn or wear a suit on Wed night.

Don't make this stuff salvational either way.

Amen. It’s not an issue of salvation. However, the origins of dress up for church did bleed over from pagan Rome and the social custom of dressing up before a public official. When priests became public officials they demanded the same respect.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Whole Hearted

I told myself I wouldn't post anymore, but just had to say this.
Growing up my family wasn't in church, started back to church in mid 70's. Everyday my mother, grandmother (whom I lived with) and aunts got up and got dressed, did their hair and as they said"got presentable " for the day. Mama had her neatly pressed house dresses (those shirtwaist kind that June wore) that she wore around the house. She had better one for town and even better for Sunday.

The ladies in our family would wear their little flats as they called them around the house, unless they were expecting company and then they wore the high heels. I have seen mama clean house many a day in her high heels and with her pretty little apron on to save here dress.

Times have changed and not for the better.

Whole Hearted, I think there is something charming about that lifestyle. However, in relation to “church” and the notion of dressing up for worship…it has interesting psychological implications.

P.S.
Would you, or anyone else, know the origin of the “high healed shoe”?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by deadeye

Paul wouldnt recognize hardly anything in todays society....things change, cultures change, ways of operation change.....the Bible is very nonspecific on how a service is too be conducted....
So as long as Truth is being preached and souls are being saved, The Holy Ghost is moving, and Biblical principles are not being violated....who cares how the services are conducted.

I care to differ with you on the bolded part Bro. Deadeye. It’s been my personal experience that Christians are universally told that the Bible is non-specific about how services are to be conducted. But I firmly believe that the Bible does tell us how meetings are to be conducted. I’ll share it with you. Please tell me what you think….

I Corinthians 14:26-40 (KJV)
{14:26} How is it then,
brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a
psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath
an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

We read how when the Apostolic church of the Bible gathered everyone of them had a psalm, a teaching, a tongue, a revelation, an interpretation, etc. However, Paul wanted all of these saints to edify the Church not divide the church.

{14:27} If any man speak in an [unknown] tongue, [let it
be] by two, or at the most [by] three, and [that] by course;
and let one interpret. {14:28} But if there be no interpreter,
let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to
himself, and to God.

If any man were to speak in an unknown tongue, it was to be by two, or at most be three, one at a time, and after the two or three spoke in tongues there was to be an interpreter. But if it was discovered that no interpreter was present, the one with the utterance was to keep silence in the gathering, and speak to their selves and to God.

{14:29} Let the prophets speak two or
three, and let the other judge. {14:30} If [any thing] be
revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his
peace. {14:31} For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all
may learn, and all may be comforted.

Those elders gifted with prophesy (anointed teaching/preaching) were to speak to the group as two or at most three. When one elder was speaking the others were to listen and judge as to its truthfulness, biblicity, and doctrinal content. If anything were revealed to another that is attending the meeting, the one who was first speaking (including the elders) were to hold his peace and allow that brother to share his revelation or understanding. This was so that all could prophesy one at a time so that all might learn and so that all might be comforted.

{14:32} And the
spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. {14:33}
For God is not [the author] of confusion, but of peace, as in
all churches of the saints.

Those with a revelation who prophesied before the church gathering were to remain submitted to the elders of the gathering. Those prophesying to one another were to respect one another by being subject to one another. This was done by allowing all to speak in turn. This was to prevent confusion in the meetings because God isn’t the author of confusion, but of peace.

{14:34} Let your women keep
silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to
speak; but [they are commanded] to be under obedience, as
also saith the law. {14:35} And if they will learn any thing,
let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for
women to speak in the church. {14:36} What? came the
word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?

Here we see Paul addressing women in worship. Apparently some in Corinth were appealing to the Law and claiming that women should keep silence in the church. These taught that the women were only to learn from their husbands at home, because they thought it was a shame for a woman to speak in church. Paul addresses this by asking, “What? Came the word of God out from you? Or cam it unto you only?” In other words, “Are you arrogant men the authors of holy writ? Or did God strictly give you the Scriptures only?” Paul’s point was that women were used of God throughout biblical times and that the Corinthian attitude with this was deplorable.

{14:37} If any man think himself to be a prophet, or
spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write
unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

This is perhaps the most important point in this passage. Here Paul admonishes the Corinthian believers. If any man think himself to be a prophet, or perhaps even spiritual, let that person acknowledge that the things Paul just wrote unto them are not just Paul’s suggestions, but they are the “commandments of the Lord”.

{14:38} But if
any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant. {14:39}
Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to
speak with tongues. {14:40} Let all things be done decently
and in order.

Here Paul comes to a conclusion on this matter. Paul states that if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant. The actual translation of this phrase translates, “If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.” In other words this is the standard form of meeting present in the church. To disregard these “commandments of the Lord” should lead one to be unrecognized by the church. Paul also admonishes them all to covet the gift of prophecy, and not to forbid speaking in tongues. Paul’s teaching ends with the plea for all things to be done decently and in order.

As you can see there actually is a specific way serves are to be conducted. Please note the break down in summary,

-All present are to contribute something to the gathering, but it must edify.
-Speaking an utterance in tongues was regulated to two or at most three with an interpreter.
-All were allowed to prophesy in turn as the group discussed Christian teaching together. (Participatory meeting)
-There was to be mutual respect and submission.
-Women indeed were allowed to prophesy.
-These are the “commandments of the Lord”.
-Anyone not abiding by this form was to be unrecognized.
-All were to prophesy. This developed spiritual maturity.
-Tongues should never be forbidden.
-However, all things were to be done decently and in order.

Now, today we crowd 200 to 500 people or more into a building to sit and listen to one man prophesy for 30 minutes or so. None are permitted to stand and teach the congregation. If a man stood with an understanding to share the pastor would rarely hold his peace and allow the man to speak. If so, this would be seen as a disturbance. Gatherings were small and the group shared Scripture and discussed truths together, each speaking and teaching one at a time….not so in today’s church. Those who preach are held in higher esteem than those who don’t. Many churches have a hand full of men whose callings will never be realized. In fact, they are frustrated on the pews. In Paul’s model no man’s gift would be unused; no one would go to the grave with their music still in them. In fact, the model Paul gives us is more akin to a home Bible study than our traditional church services. If you study it out… our church services as we know them can be traced back through the Protestants, to the Catholics, to the Sophists, and to Aristotelian schools of pagan philosophy.

So I present to you that indeed, the Bible does tell us how to conduct our church gatherings.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by deadeye

Amen!!!

Dont you get sick of folks going around looking like extreme white trash.....hair a mess, sloppy clothes, unshaven, ...there just isnt anymore dignity in our society nowadays.

Wow. Relax bro. lol