Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh
Alright, the hairstyles look like the 1890's and the clothing is an updated version of 1950 styles.
If pants are not modest on women, then they are not modest on men either.  |
sometimes they are not and I am just against that as any. The difference is that men's seams are a little lower and don't form to the body as much in general. Women's clothing not the case and they clearly form more which is not good considering the tendency of man. I am not against the "split" per se in the legs but the style of pants women wear which is like men and you can't tell the difference let alone the lust test. It's just not good. Women are held to a higher level in this. Consistently they are in a place of honor in which they bring glory to the head and not to bring attention or unwanted desire from other but of purity. This is consistently taught among the early church in much the case that women would not be a stumbling block to there fellow Christians do to beauty or whatever. This was the case with jewelry and many other things the early writers wrote against. The first call in many cases is do no harm because of love.
Today that is not what it's about even among some of the young ladies in the UPC. It''s all about selling a person's self and the means available to get there. We should be seeking to honor God in the greatest way by love and not blurring lines of distinction and headship. In this we honor God and give him glory to not grasp after the flesh or allow others flesh to profit off our alluring styles and provocative clothing. Let them see the heart of the Spirit and honor of who we are in the divine order of creation. Not blurring the lines which is not mature in Christ which is so easy today. I do not make it a heaven or hell issue but one showing a better and more honorable way. Love is what it is all about and the things I see most Christian women wearing....... sorry it's not honorable IMO in most cases!
Hybrid Mode
