PDA

View Full Version : What Guys Think about Modesty


Orthodoxy
04-12-2011, 09:25 AM
This video has been floating around recently on Facebook and YouTube.

This preacher is not UPC. He's a Reformed charismatic named C. J. Mahaney who is the founding pastor of Covenant Life Church in Maryland. (http://www.covlife.org/)

Video clip taken from the full length sermon. Here is the free MP3 download: http://www.sovereigngracestore.com/ProductInfo.aspx?productid=A1170-06-51

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVMZoZoKT-o

Charnock
04-12-2011, 09:29 AM
Remember this:

The attitudes presented in the video lead to all manner of sexual perversion.

This is a heart issue. It's not right, accurate, or fair to blame polluted thought processes on the behaviors of those who surround us.

Orthodoxy
04-12-2011, 09:31 AM
Remember this:

The attitudes presented in the video lead to all manner of sexual perversion.

This is a heart issue. It's not right, accurate, or fair to blame polluted thought processes on the behaviors of those who surround us.

No blame intended. We are totally responsible for our thoughts and actions.

But I'm thankful for Christians who choose not to place a stumbling block in their brother's way.

Charnock
04-12-2011, 09:33 AM
No blame intended. We are totally responsible for our thoughts and actions.

But I'm thankful for Christians who choose not to place a stumbling block in their brother's way.

There is no limit to potential stumbling blocks. Some people simply trip over their own feet.

Digging4Truth
04-12-2011, 09:36 AM
Remember this:

The attitudes presented in the video lead to all manner of sexual perversion.

What?!?

Orthodoxy
04-12-2011, 09:38 AM
What?!?

I did a double-take when I read that too.

Digging4Truth
04-12-2011, 09:39 AM
There is no limit to potential stumbling blocks. Some people simply trip over their own feet.

Some do. And some don't. So a broad brush statement isn't accurate no matter what it is.

Charnock
04-12-2011, 09:40 AM
What?!?

It blames the sins of the males on the appearance of the females.

Therefore, to fix the problem...

1. Women must wear more clothes.
2. Men must feel guilty for being men.

A great recipe for perversion.

Charnock
04-12-2011, 09:40 AM
By the way, I loathe the dramatic presentation of the video.

Truthseeker
04-12-2011, 09:53 AM
Women should dress modet not so much to help men out but because they themselves have modesty in their hearts.

Digging4Truth
04-12-2011, 09:58 AM
It blames the sins of the males on the appearance of the females.

Therefore, to fix the problem...

1. Women must wear more clothes.
2. Men must feel guilty for being men.

A great recipe for perversion.

Well we see this through different eyes.

I don't see it as blaming the sins of the males on the appearance of women. I hear a man admitting his fallen state and the battle in his mind that he faces day by day. I also hear him speaking of areas that give him particular trouble and giving thanks to the godly ladies in his life that dress in a manner that is modest and chaste.

He is also young. The Bible speaks of youthful lusts. I'm 47 and married. I don't have the struggles a young unmarried man has and I certainly don't pretend that I do.

If his attitude were one where he stated that this is why I fail. Then that would be blame. But he is saying this is what I fight and I do what I have to do to succeed.

scotty
04-12-2011, 09:58 AM
Women should dress modet not so much to help men out but because they themselves have modesty in their hearts.

Exactly ! :thumbsup

I teach my daughters to dress modestly not because they may cause men to stumble but because they should respect themselves.

Digging4Truth
04-12-2011, 09:59 AM
Women should dress modest not so much to help men out but because they themselves have modesty in their hearts.

Indeed.

Truthseeker
04-12-2011, 10:05 AM
Exactly ! :thumbsup

I teach my daughters to dress modestly not because they may cause men to stumble but because they should respect themselves.

Yes, I will teach my girl a man must earn the right to your body. No cheap shows. :thumbsup

Truthseeker
04-12-2011, 10:08 AM
It's not complicated, what is the basis for a women to show her breast? to be sensual towards men. Same with legs, behind, curves etc.....

I have to be responsible for my own heart, but women do as well.

Digging4Truth
04-12-2011, 10:33 AM
Exactly ! :thumbsup

I teach my daughters to dress modestly not because they may cause men to stumble but because they should respect themselves.

It's not complicated, what is the basis for a women to show her breast? to be sensual towards men. Same with legs, behind, curves etc.....

I have to be responsible for my own heart, but women do as well.

Great posts.

warrior
04-12-2011, 10:49 AM
I'm in total agreement with modesty for men and women, but why can't the lust that these men experience and complain about be dealt with. They are blaming women for their sinful mindsets. This is shameful!

Hoovie
04-12-2011, 11:00 AM
I like the video a lot. This does not need to be viewed from pro-burka point of view.

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 11:01 AM
While I agree that women should strive to show respect to themselves and others by being modest, I do NOT agree that men have the right to blame scantily clad women for their sins.

If we go to the mall and there are scantily clad women/girls (and there always are), I expect (and reasonably so) my husband to keep his thoughts in subjection to Christ.

And why is it that the "brothers" need more help overcoming this problem than any other man? Really? I thought being filled with God's Spirit gave people more power to overcome sin? I thought following after the Spirit would help people not fulfill the lusts of the flesh?

I realize men are driven by sexuality. God made them that way. But I Corinthians 10:13 says,

"There hath NO TEMPTATION TAKEN YOU but such as is COMMON to man; but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able, but will with the temptation also make a way of escape that ye may be able to bear it." [emphasis mine]

No excuses, boys. Sorry. Keep your minds and bodies pure--just as pure as you expect ladies to keep theirs--and explore sexuality within the bounds of marriage. It's plain and simple.

Hoovie
04-12-2011, 11:06 AM
If I thought EXCUSES were being made in the video, I would reject it. I did not see that.

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 11:08 AM
It's not complicated, what is the basis for a women to show her breast? to be sensual towards men. Same with legs, behind, curves etc.....

I have to be responsible for my own heart, but women do as well.

Right, and I agree. But the responsibility can't be shifted around. If you lust, that's 100% on you. If a woman is purposely sensual, that's 100% on her.

I take issue with two things:

1. Men thinking that all women are looking sensual on purpose. Some do; some are simply thoughtless.

2. Trying to shift blame. If you sin with your body or your thoughts, that's your responsibility. There's really no way around that. If you kill someone in cold blood, it really doesn't matter if they made you angry first. You're guilty of murder.

Hoovie
04-12-2011, 11:10 AM
We go to the beach from time to time, I'll readily admit it is not easy to keep the thoughts pure all the time. The amount of skin females expose, does impact the way males respond and view them. Not an excuse. A simple fact, about ALL men.

IvyWalker
04-12-2011, 11:11 AM
Right, and I agree. But the responsibility can't be shifted around. If you lust, that's 100% on you. If a woman is purposely sensual, that's 100% on her.

I take issue with two things:

1. Men thinking that all women are looking sensual on purpose. Some do; some are simply thoughtless.

2. Trying to shift blame. If you sin with your body or your thoughts, that's your responsibility. There's really no way around that. If you kill someone in cold blood, it really doesn't matter if they made you angry first. You're guilty of murder.

If only it were true for men that anger was to murder what visual stimuli is to lust.

IvyWalker
04-12-2011, 11:13 AM
We go to the beach from time to time, I'll readily admit it is not easy to keep the thoughts pure all the time. The amount of skin females expose, does impact the way males respond and view them. Not an excuse. A simple fact, about ALL men.

Very true.

Being aware of that isn't a bad thing either. Men are wired that way. Men & women being aware of that is a good thing, and can help them serve one another in love.

This is true for men, not to lead women on, commit emotional affairs, etc.

LUKE2447
04-12-2011, 11:20 AM
Excellent video! Then again many will simply ask in their mind... How far can we go toward vanity, pride, and hide it in the argument of simply "I want to look nice"

Orthodoxy
04-12-2011, 11:22 AM
I think it helps to listen to the full length sermon (which I did) to understand the video in the right context. Mahaney is not making excuses for young men or blaming the women.

http://www.sovereigngracestore.com/ProductInfo.aspx?productid=A1170-06-51

scotty
04-12-2011, 11:23 AM
We go to the beach from time to time, I'll readily admit it is not easy to keep the thoughts pure all the time. The amount of skin females expose, does impact the way males respond and view them. Not an excuse. A simple fact, about ALL men.

Exactly, not an excuse at all. But it is expected. And I for one dont believe a stray thought makes any man less of a Godly man.


I realize men are driven by sexuality. God made them that way. But I Corinthians 10:13 says,

"There hath NO TEMPTATION TAKEN YOU but such as is COMMON to man; but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able, but will with the temptation also make a way of escape that ye may be able to bear it." [emphasis mine]

No excuses, boys. Sorry. Keep your minds and bodies pure--just as pure as you expect ladies to keep theirs--and explore sexuality within the bounds of marriage. It's plain and simple.

It is just that simple. But also note in the scripture you posted. "but will with the temptation" and " that ye may be able to bear it" .

This scripture admits the temptation will still be there, we will still have to bear it. And I believe it does go both ways as I would view a woman "showing a little" in the same regards I would hold a man showing a woman uneccesary "attention" .

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 11:32 AM
If I thought EXCUSES were being made in the video, I would reject it. I did not see that.

I think I object to men trying to even address this subject. Maybe it shouldn't, but it annoys me. They always come at it from the point of view that if they "see" skin or figures it "causes" them to lust. I think older women should teach modesty to younger women and men should strive for purity--they have enough to take care of without trying to dictate what Christian women should wear so they[men] will feel more comfortable. This is a consistent theme, wherein men try to address their environment instead of their own hearts. Address the heart, and the environment will be less influential.

I realize that men see things differently, and I'm not saying that a male perspective isn't valuable--and it's important that we understand that we don't want to put a stumbling block in our brother's way. At the same time, though, I find it more refreshing when men take simple responsibility and don't make it about women's actions but their own.

I trust my husband to remain pure either by bringing his thoughts into subjection or by escaping the situation. I don't want to hear him whine about another woman wearing a bikini. He has no control over that.

I suppose I'm weary of men trying to dictate what women wear so they can "control themselves."

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 11:35 AM
Exactly, not an excuse at all. But it is expected. And I for one dont believe a stray thought makes any man less of a Godly man.

Totally agree. IMO, this is why many men "struggle"--it's because they think if they see an attractive woman and they have a natural *ahem* reaction--they think they've sinned. No, God made men with a strong sexual drive, and that's okay. What's not okay is to allow yourself to dwell on that attraction, and allow your flesh to be in the driver's seat.

It is just that simple. But also note in the scripture you posted. "but will with the temptation" and " that ye may be able to bear it" .

This scripture admits the temptation will still be there, we will still have to bear it. And I believe it does go both ways as I would view a woman "showing a little" in the same regards I would hold a man showing a woman uneccesary "attention" .

True. And I'm not trying to take any responsibility off of women to be modest. What a woman will answer to God for, though, is HER sin. Not his.

scotty
04-12-2011, 11:37 AM
I think I object to men trying to even address this subject. Maybe it shouldn't, but it annoys me. They always come at it from the point of view that if they "see" skin or figures it "causes" them to lust. I think older women should teach modesty to younger women and men should strive for purity--they have enough to take care of without trying to dictate what Christian women should wear so they[men] will feel more comfortable. This is a consistent theme, wherein men try to address their environment instead of their own hearts. Address the heart, and the environment will be less influential.

I realize that men see things differently, and I'm not saying that a male perspective isn't valuable--and it's important that we understand that we don't want to put a stumbling block in our brother's way. At the same time, though, I find it more refreshing when men take simple responsibility and don't make it about women's actions but their own.

I trust my husband to remain pure either by bringing his thoughts into subjection or by escaping the situation. I don't want to hear him whine about another woman wearing a bikini. He has no control over that.

I suppose I'm weary of men trying to dictate what women wear so they can "control themselves."

I agree with this. As I have said, I teach my daughters modesty not for mens sake but for their own.

LUKE2447
04-12-2011, 11:42 AM
I agree with this. As I have said, I teach my daughters modesty not for mens sake but for their own.

it should be about both. That is what scripture teaches.

scotty
04-12-2011, 11:53 AM
it should be about both. That is what scripture teaches.

It is. Just not slammed down their throats like most want it. By teaching one you obtain the other.

Digging4Truth
04-12-2011, 11:58 AM
I think I object to men trying to even address this subject. Maybe it shouldn't, but it annoys me. They always come at it from the point of view that if they "see" skin or figures it "causes" them to lust. I think older women should teach modesty to younger women and men should strive for purity--they have enough to take care of without trying to dictate what Christian women should wear so they[men] will feel more comfortable. This is a consistent theme, wherein men try to address their environment instead of their own hearts. Address the heart, and the environment will be less influential.

I realize that men see things differently, and I'm not saying that a male perspective isn't valuable--and it's important that we understand that we don't want to put a stumbling block in our brother's way. At the same time, though, I find it more refreshing when men take simple responsibility and don't make it about women's actions but their own.

I trust my husband to remain pure either by bringing his thoughts into subjection or by escaping the situation. I don't want to hear him whine about another woman wearing a bikini. He has no control over that.

I suppose I'm weary of men trying to dictate what women wear so they can "control themselves."

Probably so.

And once we weary of things we lose any ability to see the sense in it whether it's there or not.

LUKE2447
04-12-2011, 12:00 PM
It is. Just not slammed down their throats like most want it. By teaching one you obtain the other.

not necassarily. The two are total different perspectives. Love teaches care for other as you do yourself. I know many "reformed" people who talk about modesty all the time but think nothing the reality of what they wear does to another. "I can't control help I look good", "Then they shouldn't look" ... while wearing a pikini to the beach and thinking nothing of it. They have allowed cultural norms to determine modesty and reasoning. Then coming back on FB posting pics showing them 80% nude or pics with cleavage and tight clothes and talking about how good God is. uhhh yeah

Timmy
04-12-2011, 12:05 PM
Like my mama always said, modest is as modest does.

(I'm not even sure what that means, but it seems profound. Kinda. :lol)

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 12:07 PM
not necassarily. The two are total different perspectives. Love teaches care for other as you do yourself. I know many "reformed" people who talk about modesty all the time but think nothing the reality of what they wear does to another. "I can't control help I look good", "Then they shouldn't look" ... while wearing a pikini to the beach and thinking nothing of it. They have allowed cultural norms to determine modesty and reasoning. Then coming back on FB posting pics showing them 80% nude or pics with cleavage and tight clothes and talking about how good God is. uhhh yeah

I agree. Modesty is subjective, relative, and is grounded in courtesy and propriety.

I have no problem asking my girls to go back to their rooms and change if they step out in something revealing. (A rare occurrence, btw) However, their Dad and I have previously agreed that I will be the one to address this--his response is always along the lines of, "Honey, you look beautiful today." Or, a quiet but panicked look in my direction. :D

The reason for that is twofold:

1. I don't want my girls getting negative feedback from their Dad regarding their appearance. Even if its justified. We've previously agreed that this is my domain, and when he has a problem with something they're wearing, he brings it to me privately and I then address it with them privately.

2. I don't want my husband to have the unintentional effect of causing them to be embarrassed about or ashamed of their bodies.

It's better to follow the biblical guidelines and let older women teach younger women what is appropriate and godly.

Praxeas
04-12-2011, 12:14 PM
While I agree that women should strive to show respect to themselves and others by being modest, I do NOT agree that men have the right to blame scantily clad women for their sins.

If we go to the mall and there are scantily clad women/girls (and there always are), I expect (and reasonably so) my husband to keep his thoughts in subjection to Christ.

And why is it that the "brothers" need more help overcoming this problem than any other man? Really? I thought being filled with God's Spirit gave people more power to overcome sin? I thought following after the Spirit would help people not fulfill the lusts of the flesh?

I realize men are driven by sexuality. God made them that way. But I Corinthians 10:13 says,

"There hath NO TEMPTATION TAKEN YOU but such as is COMMON to man; but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able, but will with the temptation also make a way of escape that ye may be able to bear it." [emphasis mine]

No excuses, boys. Sorry. Keep your minds and bodies pure--just as pure as you expect ladies to keep theirs--and explore sexuality within the bounds of marriage. It's plain and simple.
How about the single men? Why? I doubt any man knows why. Maybe science can explain it. But for some odd reason heterosexual males are visually stimulated by the female body. Maybe hormones are involved too.

But it's not as simple as women might think. Why do you think women dress that way? Because they know that's what get's guys attentions. It doesn't mean a man has to act on it but it's still a temptation and for us men it's EVERYWHERE because women know men are visually stimulated and so they show more cleavage, they wear tighter clothing and whatever else they can legally get away with.

Rather than blaming men I would hope godly women would have more sympathy than to tempt the men that way

Digging4Truth
04-12-2011, 12:14 PM
It is. Just not slammed down their throats like most want it. By teaching one you obtain the other.

Indeed... A modest spirit fosters modest actions.

Charnock
04-12-2011, 12:19 PM
MissB is on fire!

Look, I used to be one of the guys who believed the most effective way to combat lust is to have everybody cover up. Trouble is, even when everything is covered lust is still an issue.

The real problem is with our heart.

Should women dress modestly? Absolutely.

Does their unwillingness to do so cause the rest of us to sin? Absolutely not.

Grow up. Draw near to God. Realize that sexual desires are 100% normal, within context.

Stop trying to hammer masculinity out of Christianity.

Truthseeker
04-12-2011, 12:24 PM
Right, and I agree. But the responsibility can't be shifted around. If you lust, that's 100% on you. If a woman is purposely sensual, that's 100% on her.

I take issue with two things:

1. Men thinking that all women are looking sensual on purpose. Some do; some are simply thoughtless.

2. Trying to shift blame. If you sin with your body or your thoughts, that's your responsibility. There's really no way around that. If you kill someone in cold blood, it really doesn't matter if they made you angry first. You're guilty of murder.

Regarding point 1. I'm not saying all women look sensual on purpose but that the basis of showing the goods is to be sensual, some just fall into the trap without much thought to it. If a young girl grows up around it, she might think it's the norm and that what women do with no forethought of be sensual, but basis is still the same, it's to attract men.

Point number 2: eveyone is responsible for their heart. But let's not be naive to think as society has decayed in dress that it doesn't play a role in actions and morale failures.

David took responsibility for his sin even though the lady could have a played a part in it as well. I doubt she didn't know she was in eyes view.

Truthseeker
04-12-2011, 12:33 PM
I think I object to men trying to even address this subject. Maybe it shouldn't, but it annoys me. They always come at it from the point of view that if they "see" skin or figures it "causes" them to lust. I think older women should teach modesty to younger women and men should strive for purity--they have enough to take care of without trying to dictate what Christian women should wear so they[men] will feel more comfortable. This is a consistent theme, wherein men try to address their environment instead of their own hearts. Address the heart, and the environment will be less influential.

I realize that men see things differently, and I'm not saying that a male perspective isn't valuable--and it's important that we understand that we don't want to put a stumbling block in our brother's way. At the same time, though, I find it more refreshing when men take simple responsibility and don't make it about women's actions but their own.

I trust my husband to remain pure either by bringing his thoughts into subjection or by escaping the situation. I don't want to hear him whine about another woman wearing a bikini. He has no control over that.

I suppose I'm weary of men trying to dictate what women wear so they can "control themselves."

Women should want to be modest for sake of modesty, because it's right. Why would a women want to show the goods? What purpose?

It's wrong for men to lust after the goods just as it wrong for women to show it. One can't blame each other for failing.

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 12:35 PM
How about the single men? Why? I doubt any man knows why. Maybe science can explain it. But for some odd reason heterosexual males are visually stimulated by the female body. Maybe hormones are involved too.

But it's not as simple as women might think. Why do you think women dress that way? Because they know that's what get's guys attentions. It doesn't mean a man has to act on it but it's still a temptation and for us men it's EVERYWHERE because women know men are visually stimulated and so they show more cleavage, they wear tighter clothing and whatever else they can legally get away with.

Rather than blaming men I would hope godly women would have more sympathy than to tempt the men that way

The problem here, IMO, is with the mindset.

1. It isn't sin to be tempted. If you see a beautiful woman and you're TEMPTED to sin, you haven't sinned. It's what you do past that point that determines your purity or lack thereof. Again, not trying to be crude, but a simple and normal physical reaction to a beautiful woman is NOT a sin.

2. It bothers me when men have the POV that "godly women" would "tempt the men that way." Men are tempted by their own lusts, and enticed. When they sin, it is because they were drawn away by their own carnal nature, and they allowed it to happen. It isn't an involuntary situation, which logically tells me that involuntary reactions aren't what comprise sin.

James 1:14 But each one is tempted by his lusts, being drawn away and seduced by them.
James 1:15 Then when lust has conceived, it brings forth sin. And sin, when it is fully formed, brings forth death.

I'm not making excuses for women, either. A godly woman will be sober minded and will behave and dress in a manner that is appropriate for the occasion and considerate of herself, her family and others. When a woman feels no need to be considerate or appropriate with her dress (and behavior), she shows a lack of wisdom and a lack of good taste.

Truthseeker
04-12-2011, 12:36 PM
I agree. Modesty is subjective, relative, and is grounded in courtesy and propriety.

I have no problem asking my girls to go back to their rooms and change if they step out in something revealing. (A rare occurrence, btw) However, their Dad and I have previously agreed that I will be the one to address this--his response is always along the lines of, "Honey, you look beautiful today." Or, a quiet but panicked look in my direction. :D

The reason for that is twofold:

1. I don't want my girls getting negative feedback from their Dad regarding their appearance. Even if its justified. We've previously agreed that this is my domain, and when he has a problem with something they're wearing, he brings it to me privately and I then address it with them privately.

2. I don't want my husband to have the unintentional effect of causing them to be embarrassed about or ashamed of their bodies.

It's better to follow the biblical guidelines and let older women teach younger women what is appropriate and godly.

I think it can come from both.

mfblume
04-12-2011, 12:38 PM
It is a concern for us all to be careful lest we put a stumblingblock in someone's way. Paul taught that. Some go too far with this and all they dwell on is immodesty. (What kinds of minds do they have?) But there is a responsibility on women, and that does not say it's all their fault, and I applaud the video.

LUKE2447
04-12-2011, 12:51 PM
hmmm I wonder what the early church in the first centuries taught on this?

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 12:53 PM
hmmm I wonder what the early church in the first centuries taught on this?

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;
I Timothy 2:10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

Modest is defined by Strong's as: "...orderly, that is, decorous: - of good behaviour, modest."

Charnock
04-12-2011, 12:59 PM
Modest simply means appropriate.

Timmy
04-12-2011, 01:07 PM
Modest simply means appropriate.

Really? So, in a nudist camp, nudity is modest? (Serious question!)

Aquila
04-12-2011, 01:10 PM
Women should dress modet not so much to help men out but because they themselves have modesty in their hearts.

:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup:thum bsup:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup: thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup

Praxeas
04-12-2011, 01:14 PM
The problem here, IMO, is with the mindset.

1. It isn't sin to be tempted. If you see a beautiful woman and you're TEMPTED to sin, you haven't sinned. It's what you do past that point that determines your purity or lack thereof. Again, not trying to be crude, but a simple and normal physical reaction to a beautiful woman is NOT a sin.

No it's not a sin to be tempted. But being tempted can lead to sin. Who wants to have to deal with carnal desires all the time especially in the place of worship? Not me

2. It bothers me when men have the POV that "godly women" would "tempt the men that way." Men are tempted by their own lusts, and enticed. When they sin, it is because they were drawn away by their own carnal nature, and they allowed it to happen. It isn't an involuntary situation, which logically tells me that involuntary reactions aren't what comprise sin.
If a godly woman dresses in a provocative way she KNOWS is visually stimulating to men (there is a question if she is being godly to begin with) the there is more than just HIS desires (lust). There is what women KNOW men desire and play with it. Women are not stupid. Some might act that way but they all pretty much know what get's a man's attention. Maybe they don't know what it does to a man, but they know something is going on.

It bothers me when women think it's just a one way street. It's a two way street. It's NOT just a sin matter or a question of carnality. People are hormonally driven. We are biologically created to procreate at young ages. Particularly in the young the hormonal drive is very high and men (including boys that have entered into puberty) are visually stimulated. I think its a crock for women to believe they can dress anyway they want to and, well, tough for you.

Men AND women should both have certain roles and responsibilities in society and especially in a church community. Men have the same responsibilities but so do women. They should be considerate not inconsiderate. Selfishness is not a Christian attribute.

Men should not have to resist temptation while in the house of God. Nor should women.

Mind you, though we are tempted of our own desires, that does not make external things or people not tempters. Satan tempted Jesus

There are two parties in this verse that this warning goes out to. Those that cause a stumbling block and those that sin
Luk 17:1 And he said to his disciples, "Temptations to sin are sure to come, but woe to the one through whom they come!
Luk 17:2 It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were cast into the sea than that he should cause one of these little ones to sin.
Luk 17:3 Pay attention to yourselves! If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him,
Luk 17:4 and if he sins against you seven times in the day, and turns to you seven times, saying, 'I repent,' you must forgive him."

Like I said, it's a two way street. It's a cliche I know but it's for real....it's absurd for a woman to show cleavage and then be mad when she notices men looking. Why else have the low cut? Air conditioning?

James 1:14 But each one is tempted by his lusts, being drawn away and seduced by them.
James 1:15 Then when lust has conceived, it brings forth sin. And sin, when it is fully formed, brings forth death.
Yeah and guess what? The desire of most healthy heterosexual men, particularly single men that are younger is the female body. The more women can give us the more enticed we will be. It's a two way street.

I'm not making excuses for women, either. A godly woman will be sober minded and will behave and dress in a manner that is appropriate for the occasion and considerate of herself, her family and others. When a woman feels no need to be considerate or appropriate with her dress (and behavior), she shows a lack of wisdom and a lack of good taste.
Eh...then what are we going back and forth for? That's been my point. :thumbsup

Digging4Truth
04-12-2011, 01:21 PM
***SPOILER ALERT***

This will come to naught.

:)

rgcraig
04-12-2011, 01:38 PM
You know, it is a matter of the heart!

I've seen completely covered up women exude sexuality to the point that it even gets my attention, so it's not always about what they don't have on.

rgcraig
04-12-2011, 01:39 PM
Like my mama always said, modest is as modest does.

(I'm not even sure what that means, but it seems profound. Kinda. :lol)

And my grandmother use to say "pretty is as pretty does" - - never knew what she meant by that either.

Praxeas
04-12-2011, 01:39 PM
You know, it is a matter of the heart!

I've seen completely covered up women exude sexuality to the point that it even gets my attention, so it's not always about what they don't have on.
I don't believe you! Got any pictures to prove it? PLEASSSSSSSSSE????? :heeheehee

rgcraig
04-12-2011, 01:40 PM
I agree. Modesty is subjective, relative, and is grounded in courtesy and propriety.

I have no problem asking my girls to go back to their rooms and change if they step out in something revealing. (A rare occurrence, btw) However, their Dad and I have previously agreed that I will be the one to address this--his response is always along the lines of, "Honey, you look beautiful today." Or, a quiet but panicked look in my direction. :D

The reason for that is twofold:

1. I don't want my girls getting negative feedback from their Dad regarding their appearance. Even if its justified. We've previously agreed that this is my domain, and when he has a problem with something they're wearing, he brings it to me privately and I then address it with them privately.

2. I don't want my husband to have the unintentional effect of causing them to be embarrassed about or ashamed of their bodies.

It's better to follow the biblical guidelines and let older women teach younger women what is appropriate and godly.

Wisdom!

rgcraig
04-12-2011, 01:42 PM
I don't believe you! Got any pictures to prove it? PLEASSSSSSSSSE????? :heeheehee

LOL - - no, I wouldn't want to tempt you!

Digging4Truth
04-12-2011, 01:43 PM
And my grandmother use to say "pretty is as pretty does" - - never knew what she meant by that either.

It means... it's what you do that makes you beautiful.

rgcraig
04-12-2011, 01:45 PM
It means... it's what you do that makes you beautiful.

Well, it never worked for me - ha!

mfblume
04-12-2011, 01:47 PM
Really? So, in a nudist camp, nudity is modest? (Serious question!)

I'd say modesty actually means not drawing attention to oneself.

rgcraig
04-12-2011, 01:48 PM
I'd say modesty actually means not drawing attention to oneself.

If that is true, then we've got some problems in some ranks.......

Timmy
04-12-2011, 01:51 PM
Really? So, in a nudist camp, nudity is modest? (Serious question!)

I'd say modesty actually means not drawing attention to oneself.

So, that's a "no" to the first question and "yes" to the second. OK. :thumbsup

Praxeas
04-12-2011, 01:51 PM
–noun, plural -ties. 1. the quality of being modest (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/modest); freedom (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/freedom) from vanity, boastfulness, etc.

2. regard for decency of behavior, speech, dress, etc.

3. simplicity; moderation.


— n , pl -ties 1. the quality or condition of being modest 2. ( modifier ) designed to prevent inadvertent exposure of part of the body: a modesty flap

Praxeas
04-12-2011, 01:53 PM
1Ti 2:9 likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire,

kósmios; gen. kosmíou, masc.-fem., neut. kósmion, adj. from kósmos (G2889), order, arrangement. Orderly, decent (1Ti_2:9; 1Ti_3:2). Plato presents someone who is kósmios as the citizen who quietly fulfills the duties which are incumbent on him and is not disorderly. He associates such a person, even as Paul does, with the sṓphrōn (G4998), sensible, self-controlled, one who voluntarily places limitations on his own freedom. The virtue of the kósmios, however, is not only the propriety of his dress and demeanor, but of his inner life, uttering and expressing itself outwardly. Contrasted with semnós (G4586), venerable, this latter person has a grace and dignity not obtained from earth only. While a kósmios person behaves himself well in his earthly citizenship and is an asset, the person who is semnós owes his quality to a higher citizenship. Semnós inspires not only respect but reverence and worship.

Digging4Truth
04-12-2011, 01:55 PM
If that is true, then we've got some problems in some ranks.......

That is true.

And we do have some problems.

LUKE2447
04-12-2011, 02:25 PM
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;
I Timothy 2:10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

Modest is defined by Strong's as: "...orderly, that is, decorous: - of good behaviour, modest."


100 AD to lets say around 400 AD

Aquila
04-12-2011, 02:33 PM
We go to the beach from time to time, I'll readily admit it is not easy to keep the thoughts pure all the time. The amount of skin females expose, does impact the way males respond and view them. Not an excuse. A simple fact, about ALL men.

Interesting post.

I've discussed this with many Christians and I think that we might have a misguided view of what being “pure” in thought means. I think that it might come from our discomfort with our sexual nature. I read a book titled The Gift of Sex, writen by two Christian psychologists. They defined “lust” as the desire to actually “pursue” unlawful sexual relations with another individual. Elements of lust are typically rooted in actual desire and ability to pursue. For example the target might be a co-worker, bowling friend on the bowling league, friend at church, etc. They distinguished this from sexual “fantasy” which have elements of impossibility, embarrassment, and lack of desire for the event to be a “reality”. Their final assessment on the issue was that fantasy isn’t “lust”, nor is a sexual thought “lust”, nor is admiring the sexual beauty of another “lust”.

For example,

If a man works with a lady and begins to desire to really have her, he is lusting. However, if a person has a “fantasy” about let’s say a famous actor actress they are not “lusting”. Reasons being that they have no ability to actually fulfill or pursue the one in the fantasy, they don’t know the one in the fantasy, and should they get to know the individual or the opportunity present itself they would feel very uncomfortable. Psychologically the fantasy is only enjoyable because it’s an impossibility. If a man is in an art exhibit or a pictorial photography exhibit and sees something appealing, a sexual thought or “fantasy” might present itself. This isn’t “lust” but rather an admiration of a beautiful woman. Now the sin of “defrauding” one’s spouse due to retreat into fantasy is an entirely different matter. The issue in this isn’t the fantasy. The issue is the lack of love the offender has for the offended especially in relation to providing for his or her needs.

The book brought up an interesting fact. Human sexuality predated the fall. God commanded man and woman to be fruitful and to multiple before sin entered the world. Therefore our sexual feelings, interests, and proclivities are holy. Like Adam and Eve in their original state, we should be unashamed by them and in fact embrace them as part of understanding ourselves, our mates, and who we are as a couples. There isn’t anything dirty or unholy about our sexual nature and interests (thoughts, feelings, fantasies, penchants). God’s desire is simply that we not pursue relations with someone who isn’t a spouse. We are not expected to be a-sexual beings.

Final conclusion, sexual fantasy is normal and may even be healthy. Sexual thoughts or acknowledging attractiveness is also perfectly normal.

Once we acknowledge these things are a normal, God given, part of our human nature we can see them as the gifts that they are and keep them within wholesome boundaries.

Your post about the beach illustrates this. You’re a human male. You might acknowledge the beauty of a woman who walks down the beach, you might have fleeting sexual thought, or if you’re single have a “fantasy”. You’ve not sinned. It’s not impure. It’s how God made you. However, the moment you look at her and think, “I’m going to go see if I can seduce her.”, you’ve moved from having normal sexual feelings and thoughts to ”lust”. Now you’re in pursuit. You’ve committed adultery with her in your heart because you intend to actually do it.

I’m not entirely accepting of this view. But it is interesting. I felt that the view was balanced because it distinguishes between the thoughts and intents of the human heart. It didn’t deny the sexual aspect of our very nature as human beings. It gave God glory and honor for our sexual nature. And yet draws boundaries at the realm of true intention. Thus sexual thoughts, feelings, and fantasies are all healthy and normal. (Who didn’t fantasize and have sexual thoughts or feelings about their honeymoon or the one they loved before they were married?) When we move into the realm of intent… that’s where we might find sin taking a hold of our lives.

With regards to this thread… of course women should be modest out of honor to God, self respect, and the desire not to attract the unnecessary attention of males. However, males are males. Even burkas haven’t assisted with squelching male interest or attraction. The human male will respond as God has designed him to. It is up to the Christian male to tame his sexual nature by walking in the Spirit, and thereby being conformed to the image of Jesus, so that in it he might glorify God. Never allowing his thoughts or the feeling of attraction to produce a desire to “sin”.

Charnock
04-12-2011, 02:49 PM
Really? So, in a nudist camp, nudity is modest? (Serious question!)

In a weird way, yes. But only if that was the only culture they had known. It's somewhat akin to the cultures of third world countries where women walk around almost fully nude, and men wear nothing than a loin cloth. It's their culture, and - to them - there is nothing sensual about it.

I an not advocating nudist culture. :)

Charnock
04-12-2011, 02:51 PM
I'd say modesty actually means not drawing attention to oneself.

I'm not sure. Almost every living thing chooses a mate based, in part, on physical appearance.

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 02:51 PM
100 AD to lets say around 400 AD

Luke, if you have some source you want to post, then please do so. It will add interest, if nothing else. I will say, though, that scripture should be our dependable resource for every matter. I'm confident that I can learn how to live, dress, speak and behave simply by following God's Word. :thumbsup

Aquila
04-12-2011, 02:54 PM
In a weird way, yes. But only if that was the only culture they had known. It's somewhat akin to the cultures of third world countries where women walk around almost fully nude, and men wear nothing than a loin cloth. It's their culture, and - to them - there is nothing sensual about it.

I an not advocating nudist culture. :)

I'm not so sure that modesty has as much to do with what we wear as it does with how we conduct ourselves and where we draw our boundaries in regards to behavior.

For example, in the Middle East women wear burkas. This hasn't squelched men's passions. In fact, in some ways it's intensified them.

A man can be immodest in his behavior towards a woman wearing a burka. Another man could actually be modest in his behavior towards a woman on beach. A woman wearing a burka can be immodest in her behavior towards a man standing outside a mosque. A woman on a beach, wearing a string bikini, can be modest in her behavior towards a man standing next to a volley ball net.

mfblume
04-12-2011, 02:57 PM
So, that's a "no" to the first question and "yes" to the second. OK. :thumbsup

In a weird way, yes, as charnock said. lol But if we make the contrast with what is godly, it's a different story.

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 02:57 PM
Here's a website with some quotes: http://www.earlychurchtruth.com/modestyarticle.html

"Clement of Alexandria (c. 195AD)

"By no manner of means are women to be allowed to uncover and exhibit any part of their person. Otherwise, both may fall - the men by being excited to look; the women, by drawing to themselves the eyes of the men."

"Let women be fully clothed: by garments on the outside and by modesty on the inside."

"How much wiser to spend money on human beings, than on jewels and gold ... For women should be adorned within, and show the inner woman beautiful."

"Neither are we to provide for ourselves costly clothing."

"Luxurious clothing that cannot conceal the shape of the body is no more a covering. For such clothing, falling close to the body, takes its form more easily. Clinging to the body as though it were the flesh, it receives its shape and outlines the woman's figure. As a result, the whole make of the body is visible to spectators, although they cannot see the body itself."

"Buying, as they do, a single dress at the price of ten thousand talents, they prove themselves to be of less use and less value than cloth."

"Those who glory in their looks - not in their hearts - dress to please others."

"It is never suitable for women whose lives are framed according to God to appear in public clothed in things brought from the market. Rather, they should be clothed in their own homemade work. For a most beautiful thing is a thrifty wife, who clothes both herself and her husband."

"He takes away anxious care for clothes, food, and all luxuries as being unnecessary. What are we to imagine, then, should be said about love of embellishments, the dyeing of wool, and the variety of colors? What should be said bout the love of gems, exquisite working of gold, and still more, of artificial hair and wreathed curls? Furthermore, what should be said about staining the eyes, plucking out hairs, painting with rouge and white lead, dyeing of the hair, and the wicked arts that are employed in such deceptions?"

"Those women who wear gold imitate the Egyptians. They occupy themselves with curling their locks. They are busy anointing their cheeks, painting their eyes, dyeing their hair, and practicing other pernicious arts of luxury. The truth is that they deck the covering of their flesh in order to attract their infatuated lovers."

"If anyone were to refer to these women as prostitutes, he would make no mistake. For they turn their faces into masks."

"Nor are the women to smear their faces with the ensnaring devices of wily cunning. But let us show to them the decoration of sobriety."

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 03:00 PM
Tertullian (c. 198AD)

"Most women ... have the boldness to walk as if modesty consisted only in the bare integrity of the flesh and in turning away from actual fornication ... They wear in their gait the same appearance as do the women of the nations, from whom the sense of true modesty is absent ... In short, how many women are there who do not earnestly desire to look pleasing to strangers? Who does not on that very account take care to have herself painted out, yet denying that she has ever been an object of carnal appetite?"

"Why, therefore, excite toward yourself that evil passion? Why invite that so which you profess yourself a stranger?"

"Are we to paint ourselves out so that our neighbors may perish? What happened to, "you will love your neighbor as yourself?"

"She should not show off [her beauty], but should rather obscure it."

"[Was it] God who introduced the fashion of finely-cut wounds for the ears? Did he set so high a value upon the tormenting of His own work and the tortures of innocent infancy? For they learn to suffer with their earliest breath, in order that from those scare of the body ... should hang I know not what."

"Concerning modesty of dress and embellishments, indeed, the commandment of Peter is likewise plain, restraining as he does with the same mouth ... the glory of garments, the pride of gold, and the showy elaboration of the hair."

"First, then, blessed sisters, take heed that you do not admit to your use flashy and sluttish garbs and clothing."

"For those women sin against God when they rub their skin with ointments, stain their cheeks with rouge, and make their eyes prominent with antimony. To them, I suppose, the artistic skill of God is displeasing!"

"Whatever is born is the work of God. So whatever is plastered on, is the devils' work ... How unworthy of the Christian name it is to wear a fictitious face - you on whom simplicity in every form is enjoyed! You, to whom lying with the tongue is not lawful, are lying in appearance."

"It was the fact that Tamar had painted out and adorned herself that led Judah to regard her as a harlot."

"Draw your whiteness from simplicity, your ruddy hue from modesty. Paint your eyes with bashfulness, and your mouth with silence. Implant in your ears the words of God and place around your necks the yoke of Christ."

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 03:01 PM
Novatian (c. 235AD)

"She is not a modest woman who strives to stir up the fancy of another - even though her physical chastity is preserved. Away with those who do not really adorn their beauty, but prostitute it instead. For anxiety about beauty is not only the wisdom of an evil mind, but belongs to deformity."

LUKE2447
04-12-2011, 03:01 PM
Here's a website with some quotes: http://www.earlychurchtruth.com/modestyarticle.html

"Clement of Alexandria (c. 195AD)

"By no manner of means are women to be allowed to uncover and exhibit any part of their person. Otherwise, both may fall - the men by being excited to look; the women, by drawing to themselves the eyes of the men."

"Let women be fully clothed: by garments on the outside and by modesty on the inside."

"How much wiser to spend money on human beings, than on jewels and gold ... For women should be adorned within, and show the inner woman beautiful."

"Neither are we to provide for ourselves costly clothing."

"Luxurious clothing that cannot conceal the shape of the body is no more a covering. For such clothing, falling close to the body, takes its form more easily. Clinging to the body as though it were the flesh, it receives its shape and outlines the woman's figure. As a result, the whole make of the body is visible to spectators, although they cannot see the body itself."

"Buying, as they do, a single dress at the price of ten thousand talents, they prove themselves to be of less use and less value than cloth."

"Those who glory in their looks - not in their hearts - dress to please others."

"It is never suitable for women whose lives are framed according to God to appear in public clothed in things brought from the market. Rather, they should be clothed in their own homemade work. For a most beautiful thing is a thrifty wife, who clothes both herself and her husband."

"He takes away anxious care for clothes, food, and all luxuries as being unnecessary. What are we to imagine, then, should be said about love of embellishments, the dyeing of wool, and the variety of colors? What should be said bout the love of gems, exquisite working of gold, and still more, of artificial hair and wreathed curls? Furthermore, what should be said about staining the eyes, plucking out hairs, painting with rouge and white lead, dyeing of the hair, and the wicked arts that are employed in such deceptions?"

"Those women who wear gold imitate the Egyptians. They occupy themselves with curling their locks. They are busy anointing their cheeks, painting their eyes, dyeing their hair, and practicing other pernicious arts of luxury. The truth is that they deck the covering of their flesh in order to attract their infatuated lovers."

"If anyone were to refer to these women as prostitutes, he would make no mistake. For they turn their faces into masks."

"Nor are the women to smear their faces with the ensnaring devices of wily cunning. But let us show to them the decoration of sobriety."

:thumbsup LOL I know what they said.

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 03:01 PM
Commodianus (c. 240 AD)
"You are adorned at the mirror, with your curled hair turned back from your brow. Moreover, with evil purpose, you put on false cosmetics. You put antimony on your pure eyes, with painted beauty. Or you dye your hair, so that it will always be black ... But these things are not necessary for modest women."

"It is not right before God that a faithful Christian woman should be adorned ... God's heralds ... condemn as being unrighteous those women who adorn themselves in such a manner. You stain your hair. You paint the opening of your eyes with black. You lift up your hair, one by one, on your painted brow. You anoint your cheeks with some sort of reddish color laid on ... You are rejecting the law when you wish to please the world."

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 03:02 PM
:thumbsup LOL I know what they said.

Not just posting it for you, Luke. :) I'm adding the quotes for discussion.

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 03:03 PM
Cyprian (c. 250AD)

"But self-control and modesty do not consist only in purity of the flesh, but also in seemliness and in modesty of dress and adornment."

"The characteristics of jewelry, garments, and the allurements of beauty are not fitting for anyone except prostitutes and immodest women."

"Has God willed that wounds should be made in the ears, by which infancy - as yet innocent and unconscious of worldly evil - may be put to pain? Has He willed this so that, at a later time, precious beads may hang from the scars and holes of the ears? ... All of these things the sinning and apostate angels put forth by their arts, when, lowered to the contagions of earth, they forsook their heavenly vigor. They also taught women to paint the eyes with blackness drawn around them in a circle and to stain the cheeks with a deceitful red."

"But self-control and modesty do not consist only in purity of the flesh, but also in seemliness and in modesty of dress and adornment."

"both sexes alike should be admonished that the worked of God and His fashioning and formation should in no manner be adulterated - either with the application of yellow color, black dust, rouge, or with any kind of cosmetic ... God says, "Let us make man in our image and likeness." Does anyone dare to alter and change what God has made?"

"In their manners, there was no discipline ... In women, their complexion was dyed. Their eyes were falsified from what God's hand had made them. Their hair was stained with a falsehood."

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 03:03 PM
Apostolic Constitutions (compiled in 390)

"Do not paint your face, which is God's workmanship. For there is no part of you that lacks beauty. For God has made all things very good. But the wanton extra adorning of what is already good is an affront to the Creator's work."

LUKE2447
04-12-2011, 03:05 PM
Not just posting it for you, Luke. :) I'm adding the quotes for discussion.

I appreciate it as I really did not want to go hunting through my files. :-)

Truthseeker
04-12-2011, 03:13 PM
Interesting post.

I've discussed this with many Christians and I think that we might have a misguided view of what being “pure” in thought means. I think that it might come from our discomfort with our sexual nature. I read a book titled The Gift of Sex, writen by two Christian psychologists. They defined “lust” as the desire to actually “pursue” unlawful sexual relations with another individual. Elements of lust are typically rooted in actual desire and ability to pursue. For example the target might be a co-worker, bowling friend on the bowling league, friend at church, etc. They distinguished this from sexual “fantasy” which have elements of impossibility, embarrassment, and lack of desire for the event to be a “reality”. Their final assessment on the issue was that fantasy isn’t “lust”, nor is a sexual thought “lust”, nor is admiring the sexual beauty of another “lust”.



Proof being educated doesn't mean smart. All sexual fantasy is based off lust. Leads to role playing and other sinful thoughts.

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 03:14 PM
I think it's safe to say, after reading these quotes, that we may not want to base our doctrine on them. :D

Some quotes that I liked -

"Let women be fully clothed: by garments on the outside and by modesty on the inside." --Clement of Alexandria

"Those who glory in their looks - not in their hearts - dress to please others." --Clement of Alexandria

"Draw your whiteness from simplicity, your ruddy hue from modesty. Paint your eyes with bashfulness, and your mouth with silence. Implant in your ears the words of God and place around your necks the yoke of Christ." --Tertullian

"She is not a modest woman who strives to stir up the fancy of another - even though her physical chastity is preserved. Away with those who do not really adorn their beauty, but prostitute it instead. For anxiety about beauty is not only the wisdom of an evil mind, but belongs to deformity." --Novatian


"But self-control and modesty do not consist only in purity of the flesh, but also in seemliness and in modesty of dress and adornment." --Cyprian



A couple that I really disliked -

"It is never suitable for women whose lives are framed according to God to appear in public clothed in things brought from the market...." --Clement of Alexandria

:toofunny E.g., to be godly, you must sew all of your own clothing, as well as for your husband and children.


"She should not show off [her beauty], but should rather obscure it." --Tertullian

I don't believe God ever intended for women to conceal or obscure beauty.

Charnock
04-12-2011, 03:14 PM
In a weird way, yes. But only if that was the only culture they had known. It's somewhat akin to the cultures of third world countries where women walk around almost fully nude, and men wear nothing than a loin cloth. It's their culture, and - to them - there is nothing sensual about it.

I an not advocating nudist culture. :)

I'm not so sure that modesty has as much to do with what we wear as it does with how we conduct ourselves and where we draw our boundaries in regards to behavior.

For example, in the Middle East women wear burkas. This hasn't squelched men's passions. In fact, in some ways it's intensified them.

A man can be immodest in his behavior towards a woman wearing a burka. Another man could actually be modest in his behavior towards a woman on beach. A woman wearing a burka can be immodest in her behavior towards a man standing outside a mosque. A woman on a beach, wearing a string bikini, can be modest in her behavior towards a man standing next to a volley ball net.

I agree.

That being said, I find it reasonable and appropriate to set some guidelines. The best guidelines are personal.

Praxeas
04-12-2011, 03:17 PM
A couple that I really disliked -

"It is never suitable for women whose lives are framed according to God to appear in public clothed in things brought from the market...." --Clement of Alexandria

I have to agree with Clement. What could a woman be thinking if she was clothed only in a carton of eggs or a loaf of bread?!?!

Truthseeker
04-12-2011, 03:18 PM
String bikini is never modest regardless how she trats the guy at the volleyball net.

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 03:18 PM
I have to agree with Clement. What could a woman be thinking if she was clothed only in a carton of eggs or a loaf of bread?!?!

:heeheehee :toofunny :toofunny

Charnock
04-12-2011, 03:18 PM
By the way, IMO, the most sensual and attractive people do not need to display everything to get attention.

Sometimes modesty enforces attractiveness, and heightens *ahem* passion.

The lure of the forbidden, or concealed, is often more tantalizing than full exposure.

That's why many people prefer erotica to porn. :)

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 03:19 PM
String bikini is never modest regardless how she trats the guy at the volleyball net.

That's subjective. A bikini might be just fine if it's just girls swimming.

rgcraig
04-12-2011, 03:24 PM
By the way, IMO, the most sensual and attractive people do not need to display everything to get attention.

Sometimes modesty enforces attractiveness, and heightens *ahem* passion.

The lure of the forbidden, or concealed, is often more tantalizing than full exposure.

That's why many people prefer erotica to porn. :)

:highfive

Truthseeker
04-12-2011, 03:26 PM
That's subjective. A bikini might be just fine if it's just girls swimming.

You know I'm not refering to girls only. :smack

MissBrattified
04-12-2011, 03:30 PM
You know I'm not refering to girls only. :smack

:D

First of all, not all of us would look all THAT wonderful in a bikini, but secondly, I agree with you. IMO, most women who put on skimpy bikinis know that men are going to look. And ogle. And lust. They may know and think it doesn't matter, or they may know and have that as their goal.

There's a lot that has to do with perspective, too. I post on a homeschool forum, and there are a lot of orthodox Jewish and mormon families who homeschool. Their concerns with modesty are often similar to ours. Many of them exceed us in the placing of boundaries, but others call things "modest" that I wouldn't.

For instance, THIS (http://www.limericki.com/WOMEN) is a place where you can buy "modest" swimwear. (And another one here (http://www.hapari.com/)) To me, none of those suits are particularly modest for public swimming. They're full coverage swimsuits, and are modest in comparison to skimpier suits, but not modest enough for me.

I'm just saying--there are some women who wear a full coverage swimsuit and feel they are being modest. You can't discount their perspective and think to yourself that they are trying to be seductive. (Well, you can, but you'd be wrong--they're attempting just the opposite.)

*AQuietPlace*
04-12-2011, 05:03 PM
Men should not have to resist temptation while in the house of God. Nor should women.




Doesn't this depend on what your goal is as a church? If you want church to be a refuge where you go to get away from the "world", then yes, that do-able. But what if your goal is to really reach your community and the world around you? If you're successful at that, your church is going to be filled with people who don't yet understand how to dress modestly. Some people might dress quite immodestly. What then?

Timmy
04-12-2011, 05:27 PM
In a weird way, yes, as charnock said. lol But if we make the contrast with what is godly, it's a different story.

What do you mean?

Monarchianism
04-12-2011, 10:02 PM
I am persuaded that men have more trouble than women.
I for one want a strong man, not a weak one. Be a man.
Women dress the way they do, because they want attention. Duh.
Will you ever see a good-looking man admire those that lack beauty?
They want to be admired, and they think that men want perfection.
This is why they try extremely hard. No, women do not know what it does to men.
That we (most) do not know until we are told about it. I didn't. Honestly.
Very small amount of women only do it to make themselves feel good.
Even some think that no-one will want them if they do not look a specific way.
You could say that there are levels on which women care about their appearance.

crakjak
04-12-2011, 10:33 PM
Apostolic Constitutions (compiled in 390)

"Do not paint your face, which is God's workmanship. For there is no part of you that lacks beauty. For God has made all things very good. But the wanton extra adorning of what is already good is an affront to the Creator's work."

It is hard to accept this quote considering how some poor souls appear.

Praxeas
04-13-2011, 12:39 AM
I am persuaded that men have more trouble than women.
I for one want a strong man, not a weak one. Be a man.
Women dress the way they do, because they want attention. Duh.
Will you ever see a good-looking man admire those that lack beauty?
They want to be admired, and they think that men want perfection.
This is why they try extremely hard. No, women do not know what it does to men.
That we (most) do not know until we are told about it. I didn't. Honestly.
Very small amount of women only do it to make themselves feel good.
Even some think that no-one will want them if they do not look a specific way.
You could say that there are levels on which women care about their appearance.
If you have a good body, walk around naked. You will get plenty of male attention.

Monarchianism
04-13-2011, 04:17 AM
If you have a good body, walk around naked. You will get plenty of male attention.

:thwak

Digging4Truth
04-13-2011, 06:55 AM
First off... I like your post. There are several points in it that I had thought about during this thread and I might use your post to make some of those points.

I am persuaded that men have more trouble than women.

This is true. I wouldn't deem it "trouble" although for many it is just that. But men and women are certainly wired differently.

Men are about getting the job done.
Women are about the process.
Take shopping for instance. It is a mans goal to get in there and get out. That's because he is a man and men are wired to look at the ultimate end and pursue that. Women are not.

We think differently.
We reason differently.
We have different parameters to success in any given situation.

The problem with discussions like this is that women sit over there and reason out a mans thinking from their own sets of parameters. As I have read many of the posts (not the one I am quoting) the responses have been written with such conviction and absoluteness and I wondered... now... when were you a man? When did you find out how we feel and how we reason? And it makes one wonder... has the way a woman thinks become the measure by which the way a man thinks is judged?

The thing is... they didn't. They are judging our thought process by their own. We do the same thing when we roll our eyes because we're not in and out of the store in less than 10 minutes. I am judging your thought process (they enjoy the process... the act of shopping) by my own (I enjoy completing the task)

I have much, much more to say but I'm going to digress for now as I cannot spend a lot of time typing on this thread with work to do for my employer.

For the ladies out there with such well drawn conclusions wrought with understanding of exactly how a man feels and how his mind works...

I think it would be a good thing to at least take a moment and realize that our minds work as differently from yours as yours do from ours. As popular as it is to say of men "they just don't get it" we might want to consider that... when speaking of men... women just might not "get it" either.

I do my very best to consider who she is as a woman when my wife's thinking varies so much from my own. If I judged her thoughts and actions by my own we would have a terrible marriage indeed. But she is my best friend and by living a life that realizes that we think differently and that we can learn much from one another we have built a strong and wonderful marriage.

We have two choices in the relationship between the genders.

We can shake our heads and say "I just don't understand them" which then fosters a contempt and decreases our desire to try to understand even more.

Or... we can realize that we do think, reason and react to everything differently because we truly do think differently by God's own design. That might causes us to consider the possibility that, when it comes to the opposite gender, I might not have what it takes to make a hard and fast call on this.

There are more comments in the post I quoted that I want to respond to. It was a great post. I hope to get a chance to respond more soon.

Monarchianism
04-13-2011, 07:39 AM
Men are about getting the job done.
Women are about the process.
Take shopping for instance. It is a mans goal to get in there and get out. That's because he is a man and men are wired to look at the ultimate end and pursue that. Women are not.

They are judging our thought process by their own. We do the same thing when we roll our eyes because we're not in and out of the store in less than 10 minutes. I am judging your thought process (they enjoy the process... the act of shopping) by my own (I enjoy completing the task)


Hehh. I dated a guy that use to do that. !_! He was the only one I dated that ever has. :cool:
By judging thought process, you mean seeing the distance we can go? XD

Digging4Truth
04-13-2011, 07:41 AM
Hehh. I dated a guy that use to do that. !_!
He was the only one I dated that ever has. :cool:

Yes ma'am.

I don't roll my eyes. But I will wait in the van if given the opportunity to do so. :)

And I notice that the eye roller is a ex now. :) Probably a good move. :)

LUKE2447
04-13-2011, 07:47 AM
It is hard to accept this quote considering how some poor souls appear.

nice logic... :smack

sorry but the early church teachings are consistent on the view of adornment.

MissBrattified
04-13-2011, 07:48 AM
I am persuaded that men have more trouble than women.
I for one want a strong man, not a weak one. Be a man.
Women dress the way they do, because they want attention. Duh.
Will you ever see a good-looking man admire those that lack beauty?
They want to be admired, and they think that men want perfection.
This is why they try extremely hard. No, women do not know what it does to men.
That we (most) do not know until we are told about it. I didn't. Honestly.
Very small amount of women only do it to make themselves feel good.
Even some think that no-one will want them if they do not look a specific way.
You could say that there are levels on which women care about their appearance.

Speak for yourself, Monarch. :rolleyes2 I dress cute when I'm going to be hanging out with my girlfriends, the same as I do when I'm going out with my husband. When I get up in the morning, I get dressed and fix my hair and put on something nice--even though I'm going to be hanging out with my kids all day.

I totally disagree with you that a "very small amount of women" only look good to make themselves feel good. I would guess that a very large amount of women do that. And "women dress the way they do because they want attention?" Huh?

As for men wanting perfection--I've found that our culture and other women demand perfection more than men. In fact, I've seen men be attracted to women I thought were very unattractive. Yes, even "good-looking" men. There's an X factor that can come into play, and even a woman who isn't terribly pretty can be attractive.

I think you need to take the time to clarify and expound upon some of your statements. :)

Monarchianism
04-13-2011, 07:50 AM
Yes ma'am.

I don't roll my eyes. But I will wait in the van if given the opportunity to do so. :)

And I notice that the eye roller is a ex now. :) Probably a good move. :)

Good move for which?

Digging4Truth
04-13-2011, 07:51 AM
Good move for which?

On your part. :)

Monarchianism
04-13-2011, 07:53 AM
Speak for yourself, Monarch. :rolleyes2 I dress cute when I'm going to be hanging out with my girlfriends, the same as I do when I'm going out with my husband. When I get up in the morning, I get dressed and fix my hair and put on something nice--even though I'm going to be hanging out with my kids all day.

I totally disagree with you that a "very small amount of women" only look good to make themselves feel good. I would guess that a very large amount of women do that. And "women dress the way they do because they want attention?" Huh?

As for men wanting perfection--I've found that our culture and other women demand perfection more than men. In fact, I've seen men be attracted to women I thought were very unattractive. Yes, even "good-looking" men. There's an X factor that can come into play, and even a woman who isn't terribly pretty can be attractive.

I think you need to take the time to clarify and expound upon some of your statements. :)

Then you do it to make yourself feel good, not for attention.
Most do it for attention. All women want attention once in-awhile.
I have a hard time believing that they don't do it for attention.
I've seen men that were attracted to unattractive women too.
I never said that women were correct in what they thought.

Monarchianism
04-13-2011, 07:57 AM
On your part. :)

And you say this because.. ?

LUKE2447
04-13-2011, 08:00 AM
Then you do it to make yourself feel good, not for attention.
Most do it for attention. All women want attention once in-awhile.
I have a hard time believing that they don't do it for attention.
I've seen men that were attracted to unattractive women too.
I never said that women were correct in what they thought.

pretty much all motions have motive. The flesh wants approval as it is pride. When we dress for acceptance we are already seeking our own and begin a road of many landmines.

Monarchianism
04-13-2011, 08:09 AM
pretty much all motions have motive. The flesh wants approval as it is pride. When we dress for acceptance we are already seeking our own and begin a road of many landmines.

What sort of motion doesn't have a motive?
Satisfaction?

MissBrattified
04-13-2011, 08:10 AM
The thing is... they didn't. They are judging our thought process by their own. We do the same thing when we roll our eyes because we're not in and out of the store in less than 10 minutes. I am judging your thought process (they enjoy the process... the act of shopping) by my own (I enjoy completing the task)

I have much, much more to say but I'm going to digress for now as I cannot spend a lot of time typing on this thread with work to do for my employer.

For the ladies out there with such well drawn conclusions wrought with understanding of exactly how a man feels and how his mind works...

I don't think I've done this. I know that men think differently than women, and while both can struggle with this issue, we struggle in different ways. However, the end goal is the same for both - purity in mind and in body. Maybe I come across as unsympathetic, but I know that there aren't excuses for sin. Growing up in conservative churches, I've seen a lot of men use women wearing open-toed shoes, red dresses, tight sweaters, shaved legs, pantyhose, etc. as excuses for their own sin. It does get tiresome, but that doesn't mean that I don't see a need for modesty in women (and men), and I clarified that early on.

IMO, women need to be modest in their dress, and men need to be modest with their behavior. Women can be tempted to sin by a man who is flirty or overly complimentary the same way a man can be tempted to sin by a woman who bats her lashes at him and swings her hips. If a woman is immodest, she will answer to God for that; if a man is immodest, he will answer to God for that. Each will answer to God for their sins.

The problem I have in this debate is when men assume women are motivated by a desire to seduce them. That's projecting. Some women do have that motivation, but just as often as not, they're simply getting dressed and looking in the mirror and doing what their culture dictates must be done to achieve beauty. Sensuality has been equated with normalcy and beauty, and is a look so common that many women are unaware of what they have actually achieved by emulating modern models of beauty. As I pointed out yesterday with the "modest swimwear" links--many women would wear a full coverage swimsuit and feel "modest." Yet, men would look at them and think they were trying to look sexy or that they were being seductive.

Perspective matters, and while I agree that we shouldn't project our own perspectives onto men, men must also refrain from projecting their own masculine perspectives onto women.

Further, regardless of thought processes, the end result is still the same - Christian men and women must strive for purity in mind and body. Purity in conversation and in behavior. God doesn't allow us excuses for impurity; he gives us a way of escape when we are tempted, and if we fall into sin it is because we have been drawn away of our own lusts and enticed. Of course, we can ask Him for forgiveness and get up and try again--it isn't as if these things are unforgivable. But purity is achievable.

Another component that I've mentioned, which I think is important, (but difficult to discuss without being too blunt) is the mindset that many Christians have regarding male reactions to women. I suspect that men feel guilty if they have a natural "reaction" to a beautiful woman, and that often it is the "sin" they are repenting over. That's silliness. Involuntary reactions are just that; involuntary. There are still ways to bring your mind and body under subjection to Christ. One practical way to address sexual sin is to get married. Paul said it was better to marry than to burn. I know that in our culture, everyone is concerned with finding that perfect love match, but IMO there should be some measure of practicality involved as well. Men may NEED to get married if they struggle with sin. In fact, I would venture a guess that only a few men could remain single and refrain from sin their entire lives. It would take exceptional self-control or maybe a lowered/abnormal sex drive.

Aquila
04-13-2011, 08:11 AM
String bikini is never modest regardless how she trats the guy at the volleyball net.

My point is that her behavior can set the tone of their interraction. In fact, her behavior towards him and his towards her is far more important than what she is wearing. I remember going to the beach with a brother who had been from a very strict Pentecostal church. He was "all eyes"... almost like he'd never seen a woman before. I was so embarrassed by him because he was gawking. Now... I'd been the beach so much, I guess I just kinda got used to it. No big deal. I've worked as a medic and a theraputic programmer... you can see things so much they loose their appeal. A couple girls that this brother talked to at the beach gave him such a modest response (though they were wearing two piece swimsuits) he was humilitated by his own behavior. Their modesty in behavior scolded him.

While a bathing suit isn't necessarily "modest" by your standards... a person's attitude and demeanor does far more to set the tone.

Monarchianism
04-13-2011, 08:13 AM
Men desire respect.
And are heavy on their perceptions.

ILG
04-13-2011, 08:14 AM
Dear Men Who Stumble,

Here is the story of my journey. I grew up in a liberal household. Us kids were raised Catholic by my Mom. My Dad did not attend church. I went to the beach every day in the summer in my bikini and thought little of it. The guys always howled in the beginning of summer but that always abated in time. I knew little about the Christian idea of modesty. I remember once my Mom asked me to button one more button on my shirt. My Dad never said a word to me, ever and he never looked at me funny no matter what I wore. I never saw him looking at women either. My brother had some playboys but I never, ever found anything like that in my Dad's stuff. My Dad was an alcoholic and spent a lot of time in bars when I was young. I was quite ignorant about men and "what they thought".

When I entered into the church, I entered into something that was completely new to me. I learned about men! I learned about how I was supposed to dress! I began to learn about these things shortly after I was married and so I really began attributing all these motives to my husband and I began to see him looking at other women all the time. As for me, I began to dress down, look frumpy, and round my shoulder so my breasts would not poke out in front.

In time, I began to realize some of this was wrong. It was only after I left the UPC 19 years later that I began to realize I was a fanatic in this area. I shielded my son to a fault and hope I didn't damage him. Hopefully he was young enough when we left that he was able to heal. I was constantly scrutinizing everything he had for porn or women stuff that I made him guilty by default. Shame on me. Shame on the church.

I still haven't landed on this subject yet. I still wear my burkha swimsuit. (www.wholesomewear.com) But, I don't feel like it's all on me anymore. I eventually began to associate some of the sexual perversion in churches to some of these teachings and the huge emphasis on women's clothing. I heard a ton of teaching on women's clothing and very, very little on pornography and lust in men. And really, since it didn't concern me, it should maybe not have been taught in mixed church settings anyway.

Anyway, those are some of my thoughts. Now, I will read the thread.

Aquila
04-13-2011, 08:14 AM
Proof being educated doesn't mean smart. All sexual fantasy is based off lust. Leads to role playing and other sinful thoughts.

That's not true Truthseeker. I fantasized about my wife before we married. I even fantasized about her after we were married. lol I was young and in love. I was so smitten I couldn't focus on anything. I wasn't lusting. I was having healthy human male attraction towards a woman. You might think God desired you to be an a-sexual being, no sexual thoughts or feelings, but that's not how God created you. There is a difference between attraction, fantasy, and lust.

Just look at the Song of Solomon. The two lovers spend almost three chapters fantasizing about each other before they enter the marriage chamber.

Human sexuality is God given. A gift from God.

P.S.

You insinuated that I was educated but not "smart". Why the unprovoked insult? Feeling a little insecure about your own God given sexual feelings??? lol

ILG
04-13-2011, 08:22 AM
If only it were true for men that anger was to murder what visual stimuli is to lust.

:happydance

ILG
04-13-2011, 08:24 AM
I think I object to men trying to even address this subject. Maybe it shouldn't, but it annoys me. They always come at it from the point of view that if they "see" skin or figures it "causes" them to lust. I think older women should teach modesty to younger women and men should strive for purity--they have enough to take care of without trying to dictate what Christian women should wear so they[men] will feel more comfortable. This is a consistent theme, wherein men try to address their environment instead of their own hearts. Address the heart, and the environment will be less influential.

I realize that men see things differently, and I'm not saying that a male perspective isn't valuable--and it's important that we understand that we don't want to put a stumbling block in our brother's way. At the same time, though, I find it more refreshing when men take simple responsibility and don't make it about women's actions but their own.

I trust my husband to remain pure either by bringing his thoughts into subjection or by escaping the situation. I don't want to hear him whine about another woman wearing a bikini. He has no control over that.

I suppose I'm weary of men trying to dictate what women wear so they can "control themselves."

The very fact that a lot of men think they are the only ones that can preach and teach causes a huge imbalance on the subject.

ILG
04-13-2011, 08:26 AM
I agree. Modesty is subjective, relative, and is grounded in courtesy and propriety.

I have no problem asking my girls to go back to their rooms and change if they step out in something revealing. (A rare occurrence, btw) However, their Dad and I have previously agreed that I will be the one to address this--his response is always along the lines of, "Honey, you look beautiful today." Or, a quiet but panicked look in my direction. :D

The reason for that is twofold:

1. I don't want my girls getting negative feedback from their Dad regarding their appearance. Even if its justified. We've previously agreed that this is my domain, and when he has a problem with something they're wearing, he brings it to me privately and I then address it with them privately.

2. I don't want my husband to have the unintentional effect of causing them to be embarrassed about or ashamed of their bodies.

It's better to follow the biblical guidelines and let older women teach younger women what is appropriate and godly.

You're such a good Mommy, Miss B. :)

Digging4Truth
04-13-2011, 08:26 AM
And you say this because.. ?

Because an eye roller is one of those people my previous post talked about. A person who judges the actions of one gender by their own thoughts. In that scenario you will most always be wrong because he judges your actions by his own.

The best case scenario is a couple who sees the value in the differences and understands that our two different views are only 1/2 of the whole picture and it is only with the input from the other that we gain balanced thought.

Women teach us "get the job done" oriented men to stop and smell the roses from time to time and vice versa.

Monarchianism
04-13-2011, 08:26 AM
That's not true Truthseeker. I fantasized about my wife before we married. I even fantasized about her after we were married. lol I was young and in love. I was so smitten I couldn't focus on anything. I wasn't lusting. I was having healthy human attraction towards a woman. You might think God desired you to be an a-sexual being, no sexual thoughts or feelings, but that's not how God created you. There is a difference between attraction, fantasy, and lust.

Just look at the Song of Solomon. The two lovers spend almost three chapters fantasizing about each other before they enter the marriage chamber.

Human sexuality is God given. A gift from God.

P.S.

You insinuated that I was educated but not "smart". Why the unprovoked insult? Feeling a little insecure about your own God given sexual feelings??? lol


Isn't consummation considered an act of worship among the Jews?

Digging4Truth
04-13-2011, 08:26 AM
Men desire respect.
And are heavy on their perceptions.

You are on a roll.

:)

ILG
04-13-2011, 08:27 AM
Why do you think women dress that way? Because they know that's what get's guys attentions.y

This is a very judgmental statement.

ILG
04-13-2011, 08:30 AM
I don't believe you! Got any pictures to prove it? PLEASSSSSSSSSE????? :heeheehee

Sometimes, I walk up to my husband, pull my pantleg up and show him my ankle and pout at him. That sends a message. :D (That's a secret too, BTW, so don't tell anybody!)

Truthseeker
04-13-2011, 08:34 AM
That's not true Truthseeker. I fantasized about my wife before we married. I even fantasized about her after we were married. lol I was young and in love. I was so smitten I couldn't focus on anything. I wasn't lusting. I was having healthy human male attraction towards a woman. You might think God desired you to be an a-sexual being, no sexual thoughts or feelings, but that's not how God created you. There is a difference between attraction, fantasy, and lust.

Just look at the Song of Solomon. The two lovers spend almost three chapters fantasizing about each other before they enter the marriage chamber.

Human sexuality is God given. A gift from God.

P.S.

You insinuated that I was educated but not "smart". Why the unprovoked insult? Feeling a little insecure about your own God given sexual feelings??? lol



Let me clarify, I was refering to fantasy about women other then a wife.

The educated part was refering to the "christian" pyschcologist you were refering to.

I know sex is from God, but still must be in proper boundaries.

Timmy
04-13-2011, 08:41 AM
My point is that her behavior can set the tone of their interraction. In fact, her behavior towards him and his towards her is far more important than what she is wearing. I remember going to the beach with a brother who had been from a very strict Pentecostal church. He was "all eyes"... almost like he'd never seen a woman before. I was so embarrassed by him because he was gawking. Now... I'd been the beach so much, I guess I just kinda got used to it. No big deal. I've worked as a medic and a theraputic programmer... you can see things so much they loose their appeal. A couple girls that this brother talked to at the beach gave him such a modest response (though they were wearing two piece swimsuits) he was humilitated by his own behavior. Their modesty in behavior scolded him.

While a bathing suit isn't necessarily "modest" by your standards... a person's attitude and demeanor does far more to set the tone.

Ah! That's what I meant! :lol

Like my mama always said, modest is as modest does.

(I'm not even sure what that means, but it seems profound. Kinda. :lol)

ILG
04-13-2011, 08:44 AM
Originally Posted by Aquila
My point is that her behavior can set the tone of their interraction. In fact, her behavior towards him and his towards her is far more important than what she is wearing. I remember going to the beach with a brother who had been from a very strict Pentecostal church. He was "all eyes"... almost like he'd never seen a woman before. I was so embarrassed by him because he was gawking. Now... I'd been the beach so much, I guess I just kinda got used to it. No big deal. I've worked as a medic and a theraputic programmer... you can see things so much they loose their appeal. A couple girls that this brother talked to at the beach gave him such a modest response (though they were wearing two piece swimsuits) he was humilitated by his own behavior. Their modesty in behavior scolded him.

While a bathing suit isn't necessarily "modest" by your standards... a person's attitude and demeanor does far more to set the tone.

I've read some stuff written by male gynecologists.....it's all in a day's work for them. I still see a woman doctor. It was probably that traumatic first experience with a male doctor that makes me that way. However, I find it interesting that so many who are so big on modesty see male doctors. Which way are they going? <------------------------------>

Timmy
04-13-2011, 08:47 AM
Let me clarify, I was refering to fantasy about women other then a wife.
. . .

What if a guy fantasized that his wife suddenly and magically looked exactly like Jessica Alba? Just askin'. :heeheehee

MissBrattified
04-13-2011, 08:48 AM
You're such a good Mommy, Miss B. :)

Thanks! :blush

My views on this topic in particular have been shaped by growing up in a household and being in churches where sexuality was suppressed, body parts were embarrassing and sex was taboo. At the same time, I've heard a lot of sexual comments and innuendos and even slurs by the same men who preached that women had to conceal their bodies--toward THOSE modest women. It was a weird contradiction. I was completely unprepared for sex when I got married, the extent of my sex ed being quietly handed a James Dobson book by my mother 2 weeks prior to marriage. I know that when I was first married, I wasn't comfortable with my body at all, and I certainly hadn't ever seen a naked man before. :blink It took me quite awhile to develop a healthier view of sexuality and that was mostly due to me reading, reading, reading and educating myself.

What I want for my girls is for them to be modest out of respect for their own bodies--not because they're embarrassed by them or want to cover up their flaws. And I want them to be completely prepared for marriage and sex.

Truthseeker
04-13-2011, 08:49 AM
What if a guy fantasized that his wife suddenly and magically looked exactly like Jessica Alba? Just askin'. :heeheehee


Sin can happen so fast. :heeheehee

I know a guy who asked if wife if he could call her someone else name during the act. Amazing what people will come up with.

Truthseeker
04-13-2011, 08:51 AM
Thanks! :blush

My views on this topic in particular have been shaped by growing up in a household and being in churches where sexuality was suppressed, body parts were embarrassing and sex was taboo. At the same time, I've heard a lot of sexual comments and innuendos and even slurs by the same men who preached that women had to conceal their bodies--toward THOSE modest women. It was a weird contradiction. I was completely unprepared for sex when I got married, the extent of my sex ed being quietly handed a James Dobson book by my mother 2 weeks prior to marriage. I know that when I was first married, I wasn't comfortable with my body at all, and I certainly hadn't ever seen a naked man before. :blink It took me quite awhile to develop a healthier view of sexuality and that was mostly due to me reading, reading, reading and educating myself.

What I want for my girls is for them to be modest out of respect for their own bodies--not because they're embarrassed by them or want to cover up their flaws. And I want them to be completely prepared for marriage and sex.

You are a wise grashopper indeed.

MissBrattified
04-13-2011, 08:54 AM
I've read some stuff written by male gynecologists.....it's all in a day's work for them. I still see a woman doctor. It was probably that traumatic first experience with a male doctor that makes me that way. However, I find it interesting that so many who are so big on modesty see male doctors. Which way are they going? <------------------------------>

My experience was the opposite. My first gynecologist was a woman, and she was very unpleasant, to put it mildly. I switched to a male doctor, and he was gentle and quick. It's preference. I guess I see doctors as a separate set of society. They're sort of asexual beings in my head. :D

ILG
04-13-2011, 08:58 AM
Thanks! :blush

My views on this topic in particular have been shaped by growing up in a household and being in churches where sexuality was suppressed, body parts were embarrassing and sex was taboo. At the same time, I've heard a lot of sexual comments and innuendos and even slurs by the same men who preached that women had to conceal their bodies--toward THOSE modest women. It was a weird contradiction. I was completely unprepared for sex when I got married, the extent of my sex ed being quietly handed a James Dobson book by my mother 2 weeks prior to marriage. I know that when I was first married, I wasn't comfortable with my body at all, and I certainly hadn't ever seen a naked man before. :blink It took me quite awhile to develop a healthier view of sexuality and that was mostly due to me reading, reading, reading and educating myself.

What I want for my girls is for them to be modest out of respect for their own bodies--not because they're embarrassed by them or want to cover up their flaws. And I want them to be completely prepared for marriage and sex.

I lived with my husband for a month or so before we got married. We had just started attending the UPC and our pastor told my then boyfriend, who was 18, that we needed to get married. I was 19. I can't say that either one of us were seriously thinking about marriage right then. But, we panicked because we wanted to be "right with God" and so, a very short time later, with no family present, we tied the knot. We have both wondered, not that we don't love each other, but that we wondered if we should have gotten married then, because it wasn't coming from our own hearts...we just did it because the preacher said to. The day after we got married we were baptized into the UPC (the preacher refused to baptize us unless we were married). The pastor never suggested we move into separate apartments or that we get premarital counselling. We never discussed how many children we might want or anything. It was just the "right thing to do" to get married.

Now, in retrospect, the pastor cared more about us not "living in sin" than he did about we ourselves. I didn't know much of anything about men and what I learned, I learned from all the Christian books I could read which were very heavy on how men lust. I had no wise woman to balance my mind out. My pastor's wife was not socially available to church members much. She as pretty quiet and kept to herself. She always smiled and was friendly but you couldn't get past that. So, after attending church there nine years and assisting them as well, I know little about her. I didn't have the advantage of having been raised in this and seeing some hypocrisy and less than ideal preachers and so I believed everything I was told. Shocking when I found out not everything was as it seemed. I truly believed all preachers were good people.

ILG
04-13-2011, 08:59 AM
Sin can happen so fast. :heeheehee

I know a guy who asked if wife if he could call her someone else name during the act. Amazing what people will come up with.

And she said "Only if you want to get slapped." Sheesh. That ain't even funny. :smack

MissBrattified
04-13-2011, 09:05 AM
Now, in retrospect, the pastor cared more about us not "living in sin" than he did about we ourselves. I didn't know much of anything about men and what I learned, I learned from all the Christian books I could read which were very heavy on how men lust. I had no wise woman to balance my mind out. My pastor's wife was not socially available to church members much. She as pretty quiet and kept to herself. She always smiled and was friendly but you couldn't get past that. So, after attending church there nine years and assisting them as well, I know little about her. I didn't have the advantage of having been raised in this and seeing some hypocrisy and less than ideal preachers and so I believed everything I was told. Shocking when I found out not everything was as it seemed. I truly believed all preachers were good people.

It's funny that you phrase that as an advantage, but I suppose it is. :) It helps you take things with a grain of salt, at least.

Truthseeker
04-13-2011, 09:06 AM
And she said "Only if you want to get slapped." Sheesh. That ain't even funny. :smack

I married my wife not so and so. This junk happens when the door is opened for fantasy, lust, indordinate affections etc.....

Timmy
04-13-2011, 12:35 PM
I lived with my husband for a month or so before we got married. We had just started attending the UPC and our pastor told my then boyfriend, who was 18, that we needed to get married. I was 19. . . . .

Glad it worked out for you. A lot of kids in that situation aren't so lucky. Marrying for sex, despite Paul's advice, isn't usually the ideal criterion. IMO.

Timmy
04-13-2011, 12:40 PM
Anyway, just thought I'd add: what some guys think about modesty:


Modesty schmodesty!


:heeheehee

Praxeas
04-13-2011, 12:54 PM
Sometimes, I walk up to my husband, pull my pantleg up and show him my ankle and pout at him. That sends a message. :D (That's a secret too, BTW, so don't tell anybody!)
Real women cover their ankles. Allahu Akbar!!!

Aquila
04-13-2011, 01:03 PM
Isn't consummation considered an act of worship among the Jews?

I'm not sure, but certainly all that we do should be an act of worship.

ILG
04-13-2011, 01:17 PM
Glad it worked out for you. A lot of kids in that situation aren't so lucky. Marrying for sex, despite Paul's advice, isn't usually the ideal criterion. IMO.

Yeah, it makes me angry to think about it. I think we went through a lot of unnecessary stuff and then whenever we needed help with anything we were "bitter" or "rebellious" and just needed to "get right". Recipe for disaster.

RandyWayne
04-13-2011, 01:55 PM
Yeah, it makes me angry to think about it. I think we went through a lot of unnecessary stuff and then whenever we needed help with anything we were "bitter" or "rebellious" and just needed to "get right". Recipe for disaster.

Or perhaps you weren't properly SUB-mitting <spit>?

ILG
04-13-2011, 02:00 PM
Or perhaps you weren't properly SUB-mitting <spit>?

I guess we should have rebelled (not submitted) BEFORE we got married. Har har.

Or are you referring to me as the woman? Oh, I got that one told to me too. If we had problems, I just needed to submit. I was so miserable back then, because I really was trying and there was just no help.

Aquila
04-14-2011, 08:59 AM
Let me clarify, I was refering to fantasy about women other then a wife.

I wouldn't disagree with that point. However, just because one is married, it doesn't mean that they will not have sexual thoughts about others. Sexuality is part of our nature. Now, I believe such thoughts should be disregarded and not entertained. While some might not see a "fantasy" about another "lust" (actually desiring another), it can be a gateway to "lust". Birds will fly over your head, but just don't let them nest in your hair. That's what my first pastor taught me.

The educated part was refering to the "christian" pyschcologist you were refering to.

They do make good points though. We seem to think any sexual thought or feeling is sinful unless it's with regards to our spouse or in the context of marriage. Their point is that sexuality is part of our human nature and is a gift...not something dirty.

I know sex is from God, but still must be in proper boundaries.

I agree. The Bible gives us bounderies. We are not to engage in sexual relations unless it is with a spouse. We are guilty of adultery the moment we desire another's wife or a spouse that isn't our own.

Aquila
04-14-2011, 09:00 AM
I've read some stuff written by male gynecologists.....it's all in a day's work for them. I still see a woman doctor. It was probably that traumatic first experience with a male doctor that makes me that way. However, I find it interesting that so many who are so big on modesty see male doctors. Which way are they going? <------------------------------>

Interesting point.

Aquila
04-14-2011, 09:00 AM
What if a guy fantasized that his wife suddenly and magically looked exactly like Jessica Alba? Just askin'. :heeheehee

You would ask a question like that. lol

I know of a pastor who fell off a chair and had to have an ambulance respond to his residence. The EMTs discovered that he was dressed up like Superman and his wife was dressed up as a scantily clad Lois Lane. lol

Digging4Truth
04-14-2011, 09:02 AM
We are not to engage in sexual relations unless it is with a souse.

Typos are funny sometimes. A souse, among other things, means a drunkard. LOL

Aquila
04-14-2011, 09:03 AM
My experience was the opposite. My first gynecologist was a woman, and she was very unpleasant, to put it mildly. I switched to a male doctor, and he was gentle and quick. It's preference. I guess I see doctors as a separate set of society. They're sort of asexual beings in my head. :D

Maybe it has to do with what sin they feel is greater...lesbianism or immodesty.

Aquila
04-14-2011, 09:06 AM
I lived with my husband for a month or so before we got married. We had just started attending the UPC and our pastor told my then boyfriend, who was 18, that we needed to get married. I was 19. I can't say that either one of us were seriously thinking about marriage right then. But, we panicked because we wanted to be "right with God" and so, a very short time later, with no family present, we tied the knot. We have both wondered, not that we don't love each other, but that we wondered if we should have gotten married then, because it wasn't coming from our own hearts...we just did it because the preacher said to. The day after we got married we were baptized into the UPC (the preacher refused to baptize us unless we were married). The pastor never suggested we move into separate apartments or that we get premarital counselling. We never discussed how many children we might want or anything. It was just the "right thing to do" to get married.

Now, in retrospect, the pastor cared more about us not "living in sin" than he did about we ourselves. I didn't know much of anything about men and what I learned, I learned from all the Christian books I could read which were very heavy on how men lust. I had no wise woman to balance my mind out. My pastor's wife was not socially available to church members much. She as pretty quiet and kept to herself. She always smiled and was friendly but you couldn't get past that. So, after attending church there nine years and assisting them as well, I know little about her. I didn't have the advantage of having been raised in this and seeing some hypocrisy and less than ideal preachers and so I believed everything I was told. Shocking when I found out not everything was as it seemed. I truly believed all preachers were good people.

I knew a couple that were unmarried and were contemplating moving in together because of some extenuating circumstances. The pastor and most of the younger ministers told the young man that they'd not allow her to move in. Strangely enough two older saints in their 70's said that they'd had let her move in. I was perplexed.

Aquila
04-14-2011, 09:09 AM
Typos are funny sometimes. A souse, among other things, means a drunkard. LOL

ROFL!

ILG
04-14-2011, 09:10 AM
I knew a couple that were unmarried and were contemplating moving in together because of some extenuating circumstances. The pastor and most of the younger ministers told the young man that they'd not allow her to move in. Strangely enough two older saints in their 70's said that they'd had let her move in. I was perplexed.

This whole conversation has brought up a lot of feelings I didn't even realize were there.

Truthseeker
04-14-2011, 12:24 PM
You would ask a question like that. lol

I know of a pastor who fell off a chair and had to have an ambulance respond to his residence. The EMTs discovered that he was dressed up like Superman and his wife was dressed up as a scantily clad Lois Lane. lol

Obviously not a holiness preacher. :heeheehee

Digging4Truth
04-14-2011, 01:49 PM
You would ask a question like that. lol

I know of a pastor who fell off a chair and had to have an ambulance respond to his residence. The EMTs discovered that he was dressed up like Superman and his wife was dressed up as a scantily clad Lois Lane. lol

My apologies if my reaction is inappropriate but... that is funny.

Michlow
04-15-2011, 02:39 PM
This was an interesting thread, because I tend not to think about these things anymore. Certainly not in regards to my husband (who is an atheist), and there is little question of me dressing modestly, I am after all 7 months pregnant!

I did however when I posted my baby bump picture here, decide not to post the 2nd one that showed my bare belly. Not because I thought it was immodest (I posted it on facebook for the whole world to see), but because I worried that some here would be bothered by it, as THEY perceived it to be immodest.

Truthseeker
04-15-2011, 03:31 PM
This was an interesting thread, because I tend not to think about these things anymore. Certainly not in regards to my husband (who is an atheist), and there is little question of me dressing modestly, I am after all 7 months pregnant!

I did however when I posted my baby bump picture here, decide not to post the 2nd one that showed my bare belly. Not because I thought it was immodest (I posted it on facebook for the whole world to see), but because I worried that some here would be bothered by it, as THEY perceived it to be immodest.

Only if it was with a belly button ring. :thumbsup

MissBrattified
04-19-2011, 12:48 PM
This is an interesting article about "sexy" clothes that are sold for kids:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/04/19/granderson.children.dress/index.html?hpt=T2

"...that is the purpose of a push-up bra, right? To enhance sex appeal by lifting up, pushing together and basically showcasing the wearer's breasts. Now, thanks to AF Kids, girls don't have to wait until high school to feel self-conscious about their, uhm, girls. They can start almost as soon as they're potty trained. Maybe this fall the retailer should consider keeping a plastic surgeon on site for free consultations.

We've been here with Abercrombie before -- if you recall, about 10 years ago they sold thongs for 10-year-olds -- but they're hardly alone in pitching inappropriate clothing to young girls. Four years ago the popular "Bratz" franchise introduced padded bras called "bralettes" for girls as young as six. That was also around the time the good folks at Wal-Mart rolled out a pair of pink panties in its junior department with the phrase "Who Needs Credit Cards" printed on the front....."

Ferd
04-19-2011, 01:52 PM
Women should dress modet not so much to help men out but because they themselves have modesty in their hearts.

so should men.

Truthseeker
04-19-2011, 02:15 PM
so should men.

Of course.

Aquila
04-19-2011, 02:20 PM
Obviously not a holiness preacher. :heeheehee

Strange enough...he was.

I don't think our sexual nature is unholy.

Aquila
04-19-2011, 02:22 PM
My apologies if my reaction is inappropriate but... that is funny.

No, you're okay. It is kind of funny. lol

Married people play games sometimes. It's often more psychological than perversion. Sometimes people need to express a weaker persona or a stronger persona. Evidently, this pastor wanted to feel like, um... Superman. lol

Sam
04-19-2011, 02:39 PM
You would ask a question like that. lol

I know of a pastor who fell off a chair and had to have an ambulance respond to his residence. The EMTs discovered that he was dressed up like Superman and his wife was dressed up as a scantily clad Lois Lane. lol

Now you've done it.
How many of us just pictured our pastor and wife playing Superman and Lois Lane games?
Lord, help us practice Philippians 4:8.

Sam
04-19-2011, 02:42 PM
No, you're okay. It is kind of funny. lol

Married people play games sometimes. It's often more psychological than perversion. Sometimes people need to express a weaker persona or a stronger persona. Evidently, this pastor wanted to feel like, um... Superman. lol

Hebrews 13:4 says, "Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled...." In my opinion that makes it just about "anything goes" between consenting adults.

Aquila
04-19-2011, 02:43 PM
Now you've done it.
How many of us just pictured our pastor and wife playing Superman and Lois Lane games?
Lord, help us practice Philippians 4:8.

lol

As long as it is with his wife I hope they enjoy themselves. At least they aren't letting the passion die. :lol

It's a bird... it's a plane... it's... it's... Pastor John???? LOL

Sorry... I think some games between a married couple are harmless.

Sam
04-19-2011, 02:46 PM
lol

As long as it is with his wife I hope they enjoy themselves. At least they aren't letting the passion die. :)

It's a bird... it's a plane... it's... it's... Pastor John???? LOL

I hope he's not faster than a speeding bullet....."

Timmy
04-19-2011, 02:47 PM
I hope he's not faster than a speeding bullet....."

:spit

Aquila
04-19-2011, 02:49 PM
I hope he's not faster than a speeding bullet....."

:killinme

RandyWayne
04-19-2011, 03:15 PM
lol

As long as it is with his wife I hope they enjoy themselves. At least they aren't letting the passion die. :lol

It's a bird... it's a plane... it's... it's... Pastor John???? LOL

Sorry... I think some games between a married couple are harmless.

I do believe that some are so fervent in their quest for modesty, both in themselves and others, that they ultimately have to make sex itself sinful, even if it is legal (marital) unless it is in the bedroom with the door closed (even though there may be no one else in the house), the lights off, and fully clothed.

I just don't see any of the more starched collar people actually having any fun while engaged (to use a phrase from Brave New World).

Truthseeker
04-19-2011, 03:38 PM
Hebrews 13:4 says, "Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled...." In my opinion that makes it just about "anything goes" between consenting adults.

Actually, if you research out it teaching to keep the married bed undefiled.


Heb 13:4

4 Let marriage be held in honor (esteemed worthy, precious, of great price, and especially dear) in all things. And thus let the marriage bed be undefiled (kept undishonored); for God will judge and punish the unchaste [all guilty of sexual vice] and adulterous.
AMP

Truthseeker
04-19-2011, 03:51 PM
Role playing and fantasy about another then what your mate is, is defiling the married bed.

playing doctor/patient affair is acting out sin. Tell me how that is not defiling?

RandyWayne
04-19-2011, 08:47 PM
Role playing and fantasy about another then what your mate is, is defiling the married bed.

playing doctor/patient affair is acting out sin. Tell me how that is not defiling?

I do not believe it is possible for a married couple, acting of their own accord and by themselves, to defile themselves in a sexual manner.

Having said that......

We've never "role played" ourselves. I've never been too keen on my wife being excited by someone other than me. Part of THIS feeling probably comes from my many "extra curricular" activities during my swinging 20's when I had, mmmmmmm, more then one tryst.

I can see a couple where both were virgins (or only had an "oops" once or twice) before their marriage having great fun doing the doctor and patient thing. :)

Aquila
04-20-2011, 06:44 AM
I do believe that some are so fervent in their quest for modesty, both in themselves and others, that they ultimately have to make sex itself sinful, even if it is legal (marital) unless it is in the bedroom with the door closed (even though there may be no one else in the house), the lights off, and fully clothed.

I just don't see any of the more starched collar people actually having any fun while engaged (to use a phrase from Brave New World).

I've discovered that it's typically the starched collar people who are, well, most adventurous. lol

Aquila
04-20-2011, 06:50 AM
Actually, if you research out it teaching to keep the married bed undefiled.


Heb 13:4
4 Let marriage be held in honor (esteemed worthy, precious, of great price, and especially dear) in all things. And thus let the marriage bed be undefiled (kept undishonored); for God will judge and punish the unchaste [all guilty of sexual vice] and adulterous.
AMP

Adultery and sexual perversion are one thing. Adults at play is entirely another. For example, some would say lingerie defiles the marriage bed. But others say it doesn't. We have to go by what is specifically condemned in Scripture regarding sexual behaviors.

Biblically forbidden sex practices appear to be:

• Adultery – Sexual activity outside of the marriage covenant (Namely a man taking a married woman).
• Fornication – Indiscriminant and promiscuous sexual activity.
• Sodomy – Homosexual rape, male temple prostitution
• Incest – Sexual activity with close relatives.
• Rape – Forced sexual activity with a woman.
• Bestiality – Sexual activity with animals.
• Pedophilia – Sexual activity with children.
• Harlotry – Sexual activity as a religious rite or for money.
• Lust – The desire to actually commit adultery.

The Bible appears to have allowed for the following sex practices given ones dispensation:

• Monogamy – Marriage consisting of one man and one woman.
• Polygamy – Marriage consisting of one man and more than one woman.
• Concubines – Mistresses recognized within the marriage covenant.
• War Brides – Arranged marriage with female prisoners of war.
• Levirate Marriage – The marrying of a dead brother’s first wife, even if the living brother was already married.
• Servant Marriage – The arrangement of marriage between servants.
• Eunuchs – Celibates who cannot (or choose not to) copulate with the opposite or same gender.
• Erotic Literature & Poetry – Writings of an erotic nature (Song of Solomon).
• Erotic Entertainment – Erotic dancing (exemplified by the Shulamite and her erotic dance before her countrymen).
• Sexual Fantasy – Sexual thoughts about another (exemplified by the Shulamite and her Lover).

The Bible's sex ethic is far more broad than the puritan model.

ILG
04-20-2011, 06:57 AM
This is an interesting article about "sexy" clothes that are sold for kids:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/04/19/granderson.children.dress/index.html?hpt=T2

"...that is the purpose of a push-up bra, right? To enhance sex appeal by lifting up, pushing together and basically showcasing the wearer's breasts. Now, thanks to AF Kids, girls don't have to wait until high school to feel self-conscious about their, uhm, girls. They can start almost as soon as they're potty trained. Maybe this fall the retailer should consider keeping a plastic surgeon on site for free consultations.

We've been here with Abercrombie before -- if you recall, about 10 years ago they sold thongs for 10-year-olds -- but they're hardly alone in pitching inappropriate clothing to young girls. Four years ago the popular "Bratz" franchise introduced padded bras called "bralettes" for girls as young as six. That was also around the time the good folks at Wal-Mart rolled out a pair of pink panties in its junior department with the phrase "Who Needs Credit Cards" printed on the front....."


Ewww.....

ILG
04-20-2011, 06:59 AM
I do not believe it is possible for a married couple, acting of their own accord and by themselves, to defile themselves in a sexual manner.

Having said that......

We've never "role played" ourselves. I've never been too keen on my wife being excited by someone other than me. Part of THIS feeling probably comes from my many "extra curricular" activities during my swinging 20's when I had, mmmmmmm, more then one tryst.

I can see a couple where both were virgins (or only had an "oops" once or twice) before their marriage having great fun doing the doctor and patient thing. :)

TMI, dude....

ILG
04-20-2011, 07:00 AM
The Bible appears to have allowed for the following sex practices given ones dispensation:

• Monogamy – Marriage consisting of one man and one woman.
• Polygamy – Marriage consisting of one man and more than one woman.
• Concubines – Mistresses recognized within the marriage covenant.
• War Brides – Arranged marriage with female prisoners of war.
• Levirate Marriage – The marrying of a dead brother’s first wife, even if the living brother was already married.
• Servant Marriage – The arrangement of marriage between servants.
• Eunuchs – Celibates who cannot (or choose not to) copulate with the opposite or same gender.
• Erotic Literature & Poetry – Writings of an erotic nature (Song of Solomon).
• Erotic Entertainment – Erotic dancing (exemplified by the Shulamite and her erotic dance before her countrymen).
• Sexual Fantasy – Sexual thoughts about another (exemplified by the Shulamite and her Lover).

The Bible's sex ethic is far more broad than the puritan model.

Whoa! God is like, liberal!!!:blush

Aquila
04-20-2011, 08:54 AM
Whoa! God is like, liberal!!!:blush

I don't know about God being "liberal". I think we're just very puritan in the United States with our Western values. If we were from the classical Middle East, these things would be considered common knowledge. It appears that God allowed for various expressions of human sexuality beyond our Western understanding. God designed human sexuality, who would know it better than God? What interests me as a Westerner is that God's nature never changes. God blessed men through these institutions and behaviors. God often encouraged and fully condoned them. The marriage paradigm that we see in the NT regarding monogamy has a two fold reason. Socially Rome outlawed polygamy, so no doubt the early church would admonish that every ordinance of man be obeyed. Spiritually, marriage has taken on the symbolism of a New Testament reality. God is no longer working with a nation, but with individuals who are part of a single "body", the church. Therefore in the New Testament marriage symbolically represents Christ and the church, one groom and one bride.

Aquila
04-20-2011, 08:58 AM
I forgot a prohibition...


Crossdressing (gender bending) - A fetish wherein a man wears that which pertains to a woman or a woman wears that which pertains to a man.


We take this as a dress code issue, God is actually addressing a perversion.

My over all point is that the Bible is rather permissive of human sexual behaviors and desires from a historical perspective. The Bible is also silent about various subjects. Where the Bible is silent we should be silent. God desires that our sexuality be viewed as a gift to be enjoyed and celebrated. Not a "dirty deed" to be regulated. The first commandment given to mankind was to "be fruitful and multiply", i.e., "have sex". That was before the fall. Thus human sexuality is something pure that originated in paradise, not part of a curse resulting from sin. God's laws that prohibit various sexual behaviors are specifically targetted at pagan practices and behaviors that are harmful to our health.

ILG
04-20-2011, 09:08 AM
I don't know about God being "liberal". I think we're just very puritan in the United States with our Western values. If we were from the classical Middle East, these things would be considered common knowledge. It appears that God allowed for various expressions of human sexuality beyond our Western understanding. God designed human sexuality, who would know it better than God? What interests me as a Westerner is that God's nature never changes. God blessed men through these institutions and behaviors. God often encouraged and fully condoned them. The marriage paradigm that we see in the NT regarding monogamy has a two fold reason. Socially Rome outlawed polygamy, so no doubt the early church would admonish that every ordinance of man be obeyed. Spiritually, marriage has taken on the symbolism of a New Testament reality. God is no longer working with a nation, but with individuals who are part of a single "body", the church. Therefore in the New Testament marriage symbolically represents Christ and the church, one groom and one bride.

Yeah, I can see that God blessed MEN, specifically.

Aquila
04-20-2011, 09:57 AM
Yeah, I can see that God blessed MEN, specifically.

Culturally speaking, God blessed the women involved too. In their ancient society most women didn't have many rights at all and had little protection if unmarried. A single woman often found herself having to become a slave (which included attending to nearly all her master's needs) or sell her body to multiple men to survive. So, by the grace of God, God allowed men to take multiple wives and concubines to ensure that women would be taken care of, protected, and share in inheritance. Seeing that times were so hard on women, and no doubt the duties necessary to keep a family unit or clan functioning were so laborious, many wives may have actually welcomed secondary wives as sisters. In the Bible we typically see jealously arising in regards to their bearing of children (a mark of high esteem, providing their husband an heir). Interestingly enough the women rarely appear to be jealous regarding the husband. Maybe some wives were happy to have their husband out of their hair for a while when spending time with another wife or concubine.

Compared to today’s society these institutions appear to be rather anti-woman. But this is due to the man rights and freedoms that women have in our more modern society. In short, the harsh conditions of ancient society were so difficult for women…a polygamous marriage was something that was seen as being a woman’s best option. In a way, the needs of both men and women of ancient culture were provided for within these institutions.

Men received:
- A guarantee of an heir.
- Many children to serve the family as parents aged.
- Increased family assets.
- Many female companions to satisfy physical needs and desires.
Women received (based on rank):
- Provision (including dowry).
- Protection.
- Children.
- Servants (Bondmaids/servants)
- Female companions.

Given their social environment, their family structure ensured that everyone’s essential needs were met, and that everyone was protected to some degree.

ILG
04-20-2011, 10:24 AM
So, women, instead of being complete slaves were just sort of slaves. Yeah, that's better than being a slave, I guess. ;)

Aquila
04-20-2011, 11:08 AM
So, women, instead of being complete slaves were just sort of slaves. Yeah, that's better than being a slave, I guess. ;)

In their culture, yes. In today's world, no. If you traveled backward in time and had to live as a single woman and an established man with five wives proposed to you, you'd most likely jump at the chance. In today's world... a woman might wonder how "established" is this guy? Then she'd wonder, "Can I share him?" Then her value system might kick in and she'd say, "Of course not. I want to find a man who is mine alone."

I was talking to a lady about this and she said she'd prefer the older establishment. I asked her why and she said "It would definitely take the pressure off of me having to be EVERYTHING for the man I loved. I could just be me." I thought that was strange, but I sort of see what she's saying.

I also find it interesting how a man can actually "love" more than one woman. More times than not a woman will typically only be able to truly "love" one man. It's strange how we're wired. I don't doubt that many men of God in the OT truly loved all their "wives", with the exception of Solomon because of sheer numbers and how those wives were acquired.

Aquila
04-20-2011, 11:11 AM
But my original point was that the marriage bed can only be "defiled" by unlawful sexual behavior. The Bible is clear on what is unlawful. Beyond that, believers should celebrate God's gift.

RandyWayne
04-20-2011, 12:03 PM
But my original point was that the marriage bed can only be "defiled" by unlawful sexual behavior. The Bible is clear on what is unlawful. Beyond that, believers should celebrate God's gift.

So, all that to say that there is nothing wrong with donning the Man of Steels tights! LOL

Aquila
04-20-2011, 12:05 PM
So, all that to say that there is nothing wrong with donning the Man of Steels tights! LOL

lol

Hey, I'm defending a "man of God". :lol

NorCal
04-20-2011, 12:12 PM
Actually Aquila, I don't believe that God intended for Man to have more then one wife. If he did it would have been Adam and, Eve1, Eve2, Eve3, Eve4. Adam would have no ribs left.

From creation, God intended One Man and One Woman. Anything out of that was out of his will.

Incest (brother/sister) was biblical up until the time of Abraham.

RandyWayne
04-20-2011, 12:16 PM
lol

Hey, I'm defending a "man of God". :lol

The gist of it is that there is really very little that is not illegal when it comes to whatever a husband and wife wish to do in the privacy of their own home, or wherever else they can find some privacy. :hanky
If role playing floats your boat, go for it! It doesn't mine but I have no right to force my preferences on them.

RandyWayne
04-20-2011, 12:19 PM
Actually Aquila, I don't believe that God intended for Man to have more then one wife. If he did it would have been Adam and, Eve1, Eve2, Eve3, Eve4. Adam would have no ribs left.

From creation, God intended One Man and One Woman. Anything out of that was out of his will.

Incest (brother/sister) was biblical up until the time of Abraham.

I do not know when it would have officially became "sin" to do so, but you are correct. For one thing there was zero genetic issues those first few thousand years and second, the very first humans really had no choice!

Aquila
04-20-2011, 12:44 PM
The gist of it is that there is really very little that is not illegal when it comes to whatever a husband and wife wish to do in the privacy of their own home, or wherever else they can find some privacy. :hanky
If role playing floats your boat, go for it! It doesn't mine but I have no right to force my preferences on them.

I believe some common sense limitations on role play would be appropriate. :) But I wouldn't say that role play defiles the marriage bed.

ILG
04-20-2011, 12:50 PM
I think women could probably love more than one man too. Of course that is not sanctioned by "God".

Aquila
04-20-2011, 01:07 PM
Actually Aquila, I don't believe that God intended for Man to have more then one wife. If he did it would have been Adam and, Eve1, Eve2, Eve3, Eve4. Adam would have no ribs left.

From creation, God intended One Man and One Woman. Anything out of that was out of his will.

Incest (brother/sister) was biblical up until the time of Abraham.

I’d say that God’s perfect will has always been for one man and one wife. God only allowed polygamy and Concubinage out of His permissive will. Yet, I also believe that God’s nature is Holy and unchanging. God never permits “sin” else God Himself would be implicated in sin itself. So while polygamy and Concubinage weren’t God’s perfect will, the institutions themselves are not to be regarded as “sin”. Note that David had multiple wives and concubines, yet David is only regarded as being guilty of sin when he takes Uriah’s wife, Bathsheba. God even promised at one point that He would have blessed David with more wives if David had only asked Him. So I can’t say that polygamy and Concubinage is “sin”. However, I can agree with you that the practices are not the perfect will of God.

Aquila
04-20-2011, 01:08 PM
I think women could probably love more than one man too. Of course that is not sanctioned by "God".

Maybe. But I think it's rare.

ILG
04-20-2011, 01:10 PM
Maybe. But I think it's rare.

It's only rare because men have more energy for some things than women. :foottap

Aquila
04-20-2011, 01:11 PM
It's only rare because men have more energy for some things than women. :foottap

lol

:shockamoo

ILG
04-20-2011, 01:14 PM
Seriously, I think women could just as easily love many men emotionally as men could women physically. It's just more convenient the other way around. And, you can't force emotional fulfillment from men the way you can physical fulfillment from women. Otherwise, you might hear about strange women emotionally raping men they don't know.

Aquila
04-20-2011, 01:26 PM
Seriously, I think women could just as easily love many men emotionally as men could women physically. It's just more convenient the other way around. And, you can't force emotional fulfillment from men the way you can physical fulfillment from women. Otherwise, you might hear about strange women emotionally raping men they don't know.

Hmmmm.... you make good points. I guess being a man, I just didn't look at it that way.

MissBrattified
04-20-2011, 02:37 PM
I don't have time to comment on all these posts today, but my drive-by comment is: The fact that something is recorded in scripture isn't equivalent to God's stamp of tacit approval.

MissBrattified
04-20-2011, 02:38 PM
Seriously, I think women could just as easily love many men emotionally as men could women physically. It's just more convenient the other way around. And, you can't force emotional fulfillment from men the way you can physical fulfillment from women. Otherwise, you might hear about strange women emotionally raping men they don't know.

:toofunny :toofunny :toofunny

Aquila
04-20-2011, 03:00 PM
I don't have time to comment on all these posts today, but my drive-by comment is: The fact that something is recorded in scripture isn't equivalent to God's stamp of tacit approval.

I agree. But regarding some of these things I read this...

2 Samuel 12:8
And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.

God states that he gave David his master's house, wives, and the house of Israel and Judah. Then God goes on to say that if that wouldn't have been enough for David, God would have given to him even more of the same. Also note, when God said this, David already had more than one wife.

Here's my issue with the subject...

If God didn't "approve" of the practice... why did He bless David with such things... and testify that He would have given David even more of such things had it not been enough???

Remember, God is Holy and never acts out of alignment with His nature. This is why I can't argue that such things are "sin".

Aquila
04-20-2011, 03:00 PM
:toofunny :toofunny :toofunny

:lol

I know, that got me too. lol

Hoovie
04-20-2011, 08:00 PM
Seriously, I think women could just as easily love many men emotionally as men could women physically. It's just more convenient the other way around. And, you can't force emotional fulfillment from men the way you can physical fulfillment from women. Otherwise, you might hear about strange women emotionally raping men they don't know.

It happens!

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z116/luckysweep/Ladies-Evil-Queen-Sleeping-Beauty-Costume.jpg http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z116/luckysweep/nerd.jpg

ILG
04-21-2011, 08:39 AM
It happens!

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z116/luckysweep/Ladies-Evil-Queen-Sleeping-Beauty-Costume.jpg http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z116/luckysweep/nerd.jpg

Tell me HOW! :D

MissBrattified
04-21-2011, 08:51 AM
I agree. But regarding some of these things I read this...

2 Samuel 12:8
And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.

God states that he gave David his master's house, wives, and the house of Israel and Judah. Then God goes on to say that if that wouldn't have been enough for David, God would have given to him even more of the same. Also note, when God said this, David already had more than one wife.

Here's my issue with the subject...

If God didn't "approve" of the practice... why did He bless David with such things... and testify that He would have given David even more of such things had it not been enough???

Remember, God is Holy and never acts out of alignment with His nature. This is why I can't argue that such things are "sin".

I wasn't necessarily referring to polygamy, Aquila. Your list was much longer than that one item. :D I agree that polygamy seemed to be acceptable to God.

In some cases, laws were made to regulate certain practices, such as slavery, but I don't feel that means God approved of one human being enslaving another, kwim?

Aquila
04-21-2011, 03:07 PM
I wasn't necessarily referring to polygamy, Aquila. Your list was much longer than that one item. :D I agree that polygamy seemed to be acceptable to God.

In some cases, laws were made to regulate certain practices, such as slavery, but I don't feel that means God approved of one human being enslaving another, kwim?

Honestly, I can see a reason or slavery, or what I would call "servitude". For those who owe far more than they could pay, servitude is a valid form of justice. Also servitude for criminal offenses is valid. Servitude of war prisoners is actually in their best interest in many ways.

I think our hatred for slavery comes from the instution that evolved with the slave trade and it's rampant abuse and basically kidnapping of otherwise free individuals.

Even Paul admonished Christian slaves to obey their masters and serve them as serving the Lord.

NorCal
04-21-2011, 03:35 PM
Honestly, I can see a reason or slavery, or what I would call "servitude". For those who owe far more than they could pay, servitude is a valid form of justice. Also servitude for criminal offenses is valid. Servitude of war prisoners is actually in their best interest in many ways.

I think our hatred for slavery comes from the instution that evolved with the slave trade and it's rampant abuse and basically kidnapping of otherwise free individuals.

Even Paul admonished Christian slaves to obey their masters and serve them as serving the Lord.

Slaves in the Bible for Debtors. They were freed every seventh year and owe nothing after that.

There were conquered people that were never set free. But the Hebrews were always given a chance to be set free.

Aquila
04-25-2011, 08:35 AM
Slaves in the Bible for Debtors. They were freed every seventh year and owe nothing after that.

There were conquered people that were never set free. But the Hebrews were always given a chance to be set free.

True. So the Bible's idea of servitude was far different from the institution of slavery that the colonial period experienced.

onefaith2
04-25-2011, 10:56 AM
True. So the Bible's idea of servitude was far different from the institution of slavery that the colonial period experienced.

Yes it was and they still argued that the Bible gave them the Divine right to own slaves. Did they let them go in 7 years? Or did they treat them with respect? Most of the time no they did not. This is coming from a Mississippi native.

NorCal
04-25-2011, 11:07 AM
Yes it was and they still argued that the Bible gave them the Divine right to own slaves. Did they let them go in 7 years? Or did they treat them with respect? Most of the time no they did not. This is coming from a Mississippi native.

Most of the time they were treated like livestock not respectable human beings in debt.

onefaith2
04-25-2011, 11:10 AM
Most of the time they were treated like livestock not respectable human beings in debt.

Yep they were looked at as property

Sam
04-25-2011, 11:43 AM
Yep they were looked at as property

It is my understanding that by legal definition of the U.S. Supreme Court slaves were property.

NorCal
04-25-2011, 12:30 PM
It is my understanding that by legal definition of the U.S. Supreme Court slaves were property.

Correct, Slaves could be Property. Be the treatment as Livestock was the issue. I believe at the time you could have a white slave also (but that was rare) that were Debtors. That actually how quite a few of the population arrived here. Debtors to the Crown of England.