If you have to wear make-up to be accepted....

[navygoat1998]

Originally Posted by ILG

Um, everybody has a pretty good idea of what "dressing like a whore" means. And it doesn't mean showing your knees and wearing a tank-top. Just sayin.

Great! What am I suppose to wear to the pool?

[Sean]

Originally Posted by navygoat1998

Great! What am I suppose to wear to the pool?

Wear speedos if you must...LOL, but NO mixed bathing!

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

Men have always worn paint (makeup if you want to call it that)... lol

I hope this was tongue-in-cheek.

There is a MASSIVE difference between the camouflage used by a soldier so that he doesn't get his skull blown out by a sniper, and a person daintily decorating him or herself to look pretty.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

If you apply makeup or camouflage paint as a male because you are going hunting or are in war, what is wrong with that?

That kind of make-up is not cosmetic in origin, design or purpose. It's not intended to beautify.

If, as a female, you use makeup much like adding a belt or a scarf to your outfit to compliment your attire, what is wrong with that?

If as a female, you use make-up because you feel a need to overcome a sub-conscious, psychological inferiority complex regarding a perceived sub-standard physical appearance, what's wrong with that?

If as a female, you use make-up because you feel a need to conform your outward image to the world due to peer-pressure and a need to comply to antichrist standards of what it means to be accepted by your fellow human being, what's wrong with that?

If as a female, you use make-up because your mother made you wear it from the time you were a child because no self-respecting female would dare go out into the world without her "face on", what's wrong with that?

If as a female, you use make-up because it garners positive attention from men and because among other female friends and colleagues, it gives you a sense of having confidence with your place in the world, what's wrong with that?

If as a female, you use make-up because you want to have an edge in the looks department over those who don't, because glamorization of self as an act of pride and lust just doesn't matter to you, what's wrong with that?

If as a female, you use make-up because you want to accessorize and artistically redefine your appearance into something more fashionable because it's the hip and cool thing (in your eyes) to do, then, what's wrong with that?

See how this works?

I can't think of any morally justifiable reason why a Christian woman would go out of her way to purchase and implement cosmetics except for one or a combination of the above reasons.

Does it speak to the motive of the heart? Absolutely! But what does Scripture say about the human heart? Desperately wicked and deceitful above all things, right?

What it comes down to is this:

God never demands that a woman accentuate, glamorize, beautify, or in any other way, amend her personal appearance with or through make-up, in order to be accepted with Him.

No church with a right-standing with God would ever demand a woman to do so, either.

No saint with a right-standing with God would ever demand a woman to do so, either.

So where does the pressure come from? It's either from within (making it a psychological reason) or from without (making it a worldly, antichristian reason based in the culture).

We are to be conformed to the image of God's Son. Holy in all manner of lifestyle. Holy means separated unto God for consecration and dedication. Does this mean that God refuses to consider a woman holy if she wears any amount of make-up? That's not my call. It's God's.

But we can say the following, because the Holy Scriptures say as much:

We are not to act like, talk like, look like, or be like the world and all its sinful mess. We are not to be "conformed to this world" (Romans 12:2). Conformed means to not shape and fashion yourself the way the world does.

The modern, Western world and the cultures being represented by such a world, hold as fashionable the use of make-up on women to glamorize and beautify themselves. As such, while there is no one verse of Scripture saying "thou shalt not use cosmetics", a principle of the Word nevertheless instructs us on how we should and should not appear.

The world must be rejected at all costs, because the world is perishing and will be lost. Even the planet itself is going to be destroyed!

Does it mean a woman has lost her soul with the world? Again, that is God's decision.

But remember the heart and what God asked through Jeremiah, after He declared it desperately wicked and deceitful above all things:

He asked: Who can know it?

The average person, even a saintly woman of God (or man for that matter) can't always, or perhaps even ever, peer into their own heart and know exactly what's going on in there and why.

So what do we do? Rest in the knowledge that YHWH searches the hearts and tries the reins. He knows, and if and when He sees worldiness in the heart of a make-up wearing woman, be assured He will, in His own time and place, address it, not because make-up is inherently evil, but because its use can and often is, an outward symptom of an inward obsession with the very world that perishes.

So, is it any wonder that God might have a preacher condemn the use of cosmetics? Their use and association, IN SO MANY WAYS, is just as bad as the use of alcohol to get a woman more pliable to a man's seductions, because the woman often wears and applies the cosmetic to make herself more readily available for seduction.

Why this stuff is so hard to comprehend and agree to by other Spirit-filled saints is beyond me.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

Well I shall answer with scriptures. Although I only will give a couple of scriptures the rest my arguments are clearly backed up by scriptures too numerous to quote.

Genesis 1:27 So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

Genesis 2:21-22 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

At the creation God created Adam first and then Eve from Adam.
Eve was not a separate creation, but was created out of Adam genes.
Eve was taken from a rib of Adam. That a woman can be created from male genes, means that within Adam there are must be some female genes.

Although God used the same flesh, yet he made her different and this difference was always stressed in the scriptures, much to the chagrin of the feminists, she was made as a helpmeet and companion of Adam. (on the other hand we can say that Adam is helpless and hopeless without Eve)

The differences in the sexes was maintained in the Bible and culture in many different ways.

1. By the usual phrase the man and his wife or something similar, which always put the man first. (Genesis 3:8, many more)

2. By physical limitations. Usually the man is taller and stronger than the woman. Both man and woman can do some of the same tasks, but on different levels. A man will usually run faster than a woman, and lift heavier loads than a woman. (Exceptions of course exist)

3. By dress codes, for although both men and women wore robes, their style of clothing and adornments was different. (the scriptures mention some things that women wore that men did not)

4. By many more cultural norms, like only men being soldiers, and the division of labor where some chores became classed as woman's work even though most men could also do them. (Scriptures generally confirm this)

5. By the Law of Moses. The Law described distinct rules and rites for men and women. This was enforced by the authorities.

So we can see that the Bible created a clear distinction in the way man and woman were to behave and even how to dress. There is no equality and unisex look in the Bible.

The effort to erase the differences between man and woman does not come from the Bible, but from human fallibility. That is why the feminists want men to shave their beards, because the beard is a distinct male characteristic that creates a clear difference between a man and a woman.

The Bible is clear that the homosexual shall not enter into heaven, but also it includes the effeminate. 1 Corinthians 6:9
Effeminates are those who want to imitate woman's manners.

I think I have provided a biblical foundation for the precept of man and woman looking distinctly different.

I agree quite completely that the Bible commands a gender distinction, both biologically, but also culturally in dress and appearance, and etc.

But and since there isn't a single verse prohibiting the use of cosmetics, for either women or men, then a man has every Biblical right to use make-up for the same reasons a woman might wear make-up.

The only reason a man in our culture doesn't, is because it's perceived as feminine and/or homosexual in nature.

But in ancient Egypt, or Baroque France, or modern day South Korea, men wearing make-up was and is the norm.

So what's my point? Only this: In order to avoid hypocrisy, anyone that accepts and allows for a woman to wear make-up because there's no Bible against it, HAS to allow men to do the same, since there's no Bible against it.

The fact that preachers, saints, and churches refuse to accept a man wearing make-up as an act of ungodliness, but not so of a woman, is wrong.

[votivesoul]

The Bible is clear that the homosexual shall not enter into heaven, but also it includes the effeminate. 1 Corinthians 6:9
Effeminates are those who want to imitate woman's manners.

Look up the Greek for effeminate. It's referring to a catamite, i.e. a young male, usually a slave, who was used or kept, often in pagan temples, for sex, by sodomites (i.e. the "abuser of himself with mankind).

It has nothing to do with a man appearing or acting feminine in manner, except in cases where the catamite has made himself appear more feminine in order to act like a woman, or to be more attractive to a sodomite male.

[votivesoul]

In this book:



Bill Drost recounts a story of his time after WWII, when he decided to go visit Smith Wigglesworth while on furlough in England.

Paraphrasing the account:

S.W. comes into the room and the first thing he said to Drost is

"Is that pride in you?'

Drost is taken aback and says "no".

S.W. asks him "Then what's with that ring on your little finger"?

Drost in the book admits to having a fond affection for the little ring on his little finger, but never thinking such affection was prideful, realized a prophet of God just called him on it, and so, repents immediately and takes it off, followed by S.W. prophesying in tongues and interpretation that God had indeed called Drost to South America.

The moral of the story: Even something like a barely noticeable ring on a little finger can be a great source of pride, enough for God to take note and take umbrage, and so, use a preacher to call a person out for it in order to get them to repent.

I wonder what God thinks of a little eye shadow, a little mascara, a little lip gloss, and etc., if such things engender secret pride?

[aegsm76]

Great book.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

I wonder what God thinks of a little eye shadow, a little mascara, a little lip gloss, and etc., if such things engender secret pride?

I think you just swung the war axe straight into the head of of the whole issue.

Very good, this could spiral out of control if you now take out the scalpel and start killing it softly.

[n david]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

I wonder what God thinks of a little eye shadow, a little mascara, a little lip gloss, and etc., if such things engender secret pride?

Don't stop with makeup. This can, and should, encompass suits and ties as well. Shoes, cuff links, hair styles. Don't stop with clothing, either. Preaching voices, church numbers, preaching schedules... The list goes on and on.