Question for men

[ServantStrike]

The only thing that runs through my mind is that those women who wear this stuff are wanting to be attractive. According to the Word of God, if the way a woman dresses causes temptation it's the woman's fault, for temptation isn't sin, but the one causing temptation is wrong. It would stroke a woman's ego however.

Romans 16:17-18 (KJV)
[SUP]17 [/SUP]Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
[SUP]18 [/SUP]For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

Romans 14:21-22 (KJV)
[SUP]21 [/SUP]It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.
[SUP]22 [/SUP]Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.

Usually I'm all over that scripture when people use it to try and advocate being a teetoller, but only when they demand that every Christian be a teetoller in their own private lives. In this case, when we are at church, inside the body of Christ, it's totally and 100 percent accurate.

We are to behave in church in such a way as not to snare the weaker brother. But I don't think it's the women's fault if a man lusts. There is still personal accountability involved.

We are also told this in 1 Corinthians 10.
13 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 to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.

That said, why even risk it?

oh no not shoulder...the harlot...seriously a strapless dress? Oh god she is showing an extra two inches of shoulder where she could have straps instead. However will the males in the church be able to focus on God with those shoulders showing?

This is ridiculous. Stop blaming it on what others where and instead focus on the fact that apparently youre too weak to control yourself.

So, the very place where some men are going because they are trying to change, is now another place they cannot go because someone wants to dress in the latest fashion?


Use some discernment is all most of us are advocating. And err on the side of caution. And when Grace-Like-Rain said that she heard someone as a young men in the church going through puberty say that strapless dresses are a stumbling block? I guess she's just being overly prudish?

Matthew 18
[SUP]6 [/SUP]But whoso shall cause one of these little ones who believe in Me to fall, it were better for him that a millstone were hung about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

 

[RickShafer]

Well, we should all dress moderately.
But to make rules of this or that concerning dress is tricky.
Pastors and their wives should be sensitive to the clothing of anyone on the podium.
I think for the most part they are.
If you are being tempted by the appearance of a person on the stage, try closing your eyes and actually worshiping God; - since that is what worship is for anyway.

 

[Nautilus]

Usually I'm all over that scripture when people use it to try and advocate being a teetoller, but only when they demand that every Christian be a teetoller in their own private lives. In this case, when we are at church, inside the body of Christ, it's totally and 100 percent accurate.

We are to behave in church in such a way as not to snare the weaker brother. But I don't think it's the women's fault if a man lusts. There is still personal accountability involved.

We are also told this in 1 Corinthians 10.
13 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 to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.

That said, why even risk it?





So, the very place where some men are going because they are trying to change, is now another place they cannot go because someone wants to dress in the latest fashion?


Use some discernment is all most of us are advocating. And err on the side of caution. And when Grace-Like-Rain said that she heard someone as a young men in the church going through puberty say that strapless dresses are a stumbling block? I guess she's just being overly prudish?

Matthew 18
[SUP]6 [/SUP]But whoso shall cause one of these little ones who believe in Me to fall, it were better for him that a millstone were hung about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

So its the woman fault for the clothes she wore not the man's for lusting? You're getting pretty close to the well she was asking for it argument there.

Seriously strapless dresses and skinny jeans? How weak can someone be? Its not like we are talking about see through tops and daisy dukes on the stage. Its like people would rather be using burkas cause oh gosh lil jimmy might have a naughty thought and it would be all Her fault for causing it?

And the stumbling block argument is annoying. As if anyone has time to weigh the pro and cons of every decision to determine if someone somewhere might be tempted by their actions? It's ridiculous to expect that.

Perhaps christians should stop passing the buck onto 'oh it was a stumbling block' and instead started having some gumption and saying 'i was tempted and I failed, im sorry'

 

[Tintin]

I think it works both ways. We need to be careful with what we choose to wear and we must hold personal responsibility our own sins. Passing the buck onto others and saying, "Satan made me do it" or "the girl/guy made me do it", is just sickening behaviour and giving them too much power, especially the Enemy.

 

[Married_Richenbrachen]

So its the woman fault for the clothes she wore not the man's for lusting? You're getting pretty close to the well she was asking for it argument there.

I don't really like these sort of arguments, 'cause its obvious to me, and I think it should be obvious to any real Christian. Can you really imagine Paul or any other apostle tolerating this sort of behaviour? He would tell them to get out of the church, and go back to the pagans who practice this, if they insisted. Feminism really has rotted people's minds.

Let's look at a different example. A man comes home and beats his wife every night for 3 years. She finally gets a divorce. By your logic, the wife would be the sinner for leaving her husband, with no blame to the man that he drove her to it?

The same situation with revealing clothes on women. If they want to dress in revealing clothes to church, I think they need to have a talking to from a church elder. What would you think to a guy that came into church every week and sold alcohol, or drugs, for the weaker brethren who could be tempted?

If they want to do this sort of thing, that is the reason they have husbands, and homes. The fellowship of believers is not a place for iniquity of any form. And if this sort of thing happens in your fellowship, it is not being judgemental to correct your fallen brother or sister.

 

[Misty77]

I think the problem is again confusing biblical principles and applications. Men and women should follow the biblical principle of modesty by not reducing themselves to mere objects of lust. We should bring glory to God, not attention to our sexuality.

The application of the principle of modesty is going to vary with time, geographic location, and culture. If you start measuring the hemlines at the church door, you've objectified women by turning them into nothing more than stumbling blocks. And that very act of legalism will hinder their growth in The Lord. Each person should exercise grace so their dress does not encourage sinful thoughts. They should also be understanding that some of us have not yet mastered that aspect our Christian walk. We are to encourage, not condemn each other.

You are only able to control your own actions, but you should still be mindful of how your choices affect others.

 

[Nautilus]

I don't really like these sort of arguments, 'cause its obvious to me, and I think it should be obvious to any real Christian. Can you really imagine Paul or any other apostle tolerating this sort of behaviour? He would tell them to get out of the church, and go back to the pagans who practice this, if they insisted. Feminism really has rotted people's minds.

Well unless you want to go back to the burlap sack they wore in those days, them tolerating it isn't really an issue. Not that I follow apostles anyways, they aren't saviors but simply men. Besides would they have a problem with a strapless I would sure hope not. Otherwise we might as well just starting treating women like islam.

Let's look at a different example. A man comes home and beats his wife every night for 3 years. She finally gets a divorce. By your logic, the wife would be the sinner for leaving her husband, with no blame to the man that he drove her to it?

Uh not quite sure how this connects...the husband would be sinning by beating his wife. Her divorcing him or anyone divorcing in situations of abuse is not a sin in my eyes. So not quite sure what you are getting at unless you were expecting me to share what is becoming a slightly twisted world view with you.

The same situation with revealing clothes on women. If they want to dress in revealing clothes to church, I think they need to have a talking to from a church elder. What would you think to a guy that came into church every week and sold alcohol, or drugs, for the weaker brethren who could be tempted?

The problem isnt the women. It's your opinions on revealing. How in the world are skinny jeans revealing? they're just jeans. Maybe the guy shouldnt be looking at women's butts skinny jeans or ankle length dresses. Maybe he is a pervert and it has nothing to do with the clothing. And whoever mentioned strapless dresses...please whats revealing about a shoulder? I know I have my list of things a find attractive about women...shoulders aren't on it. I said extreme immodesty is an issue but you hard-liners are throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

If they want to do this sort of thing, that is the reason they have husbands, and homes. The fellowship of believers is not a place for iniquity of any form. And if this sort of thing happens in your fellowship, it is not being judgemental to correct your fallen brother or sister.

Once again if strapless dresses and skinny jeans are youre idea of a 'good time' between husband and wife then we are just far too separate to continue this. Enjoy the 1800's fashion sense and female oppression though.

 

[Grace-Like-Rain]

Once again if strapless dresses and skinny jeans are youre idea of a 'good time' between husband and wife then we are just far too separate to continue this. Enjoy the 1800's fashion sense and female oppression though.

I'm not sure asking women in church to wear straps on their dresses is "oppression", but I get what you're saying.

 

[Nautilus]

It just strikes me a very arbitrary distinction...is strapless that different from say spaghetti straps? What about one inch straps? are those modest enough? Starting down these lines of thinking just leads to legalism which is the last thing a church needs. Are some things worn to church inappropriate? Certainly. But a dress without straps? Whats next? A guy had his shirt sleeves rolled up and showed to much forearm muscle? People just need some common sense in these things.

 

[RickShafer]

Burka.
The answer is a burka, with a head covering with eyeslits.
- That is what all christian women should wear.....

 

[Grace-Like-Rain]

It just strikes me a very arbitrary distinction...is strapless that different from say spaghetti straps? What about one inch straps? are those modest enough? Starting down these lines of thinking just leads to legalism which is the last thing a church needs. Are some things worn to church inappropriate? Certainly. But a dress without straps? Whats next? A guy had his shirt sleeves rolled up and showed to much forearm muscle? People just need some common sense in these things.

I agree with you about legalism. I don't know what it is about strapless dresses. I guess... well let's just be candid here. If the dress is strapless, what's holding it up? It stays up because it's pretty tight around the chest area, correct? And what about a bra? I'm just playing devil's advocate right now. On a beach in Florida, this wouldn't look out of place at all. In a church here in the Bible Belt, it's going to raise some eyebrows. So there again, it's what culture we are used to. But bare shoulders ARE sensual. (Otherwise, we wouldn't have strapless dresses, would we.)

 

[Jesusismyrock]

Burka.
The answer is a burka, with a head covering with eyeslits.
- That is what all christian women should wear.....

Have you had enough sleep? lol

 

[Married_Richenbrachen]

Once again if strapless dresses and skinny jeans are youre idea of a 'good time' between husband and wife then we are just far too separate to continue this. Enjoy the 1800's fashion sense and female oppression though.

You're probably right. Hence the need for denominations. You keep going to your "liberal church" with its so-called "women's lib", newfangled "fancy doctrines" and "trendy youth", and I'll keep going to mine, which has some vestiges of respectability left.

I don't see why people are so negative about the older fashion senses, either. Probably in the 1800s, men knew how to dress like men, and women like women. You call that oppression - I call it liberty.

 

[RickShafer]

Well,.......I see where this thread is headed, so I went to it's logical conclusion.
- - (Called sarcasm)

Burkas for all saved sisters,....lest they tempt their weakened brothers!

We shall cut off all of the heads of the infidels!

 

[Tintin]

You're probably right. Hence the need for denominations. You keep going to your "liberal church" with its so-called "women's lib", newfangled "fancy doctrines" and "trendy youth", and I'll keep going to mine, which has some vestiges of respectability left.

I don't see why people are so negative about the older fashion senses, either. Probably in the 1800s, men knew how to dress like men, and women like women. You call that oppression - I call it liberty.

This is silly. While you both make some good points, you need to stop throwing stones at each other (example: this last post is just you saying extreme things to bait him). I think the women who had to wear corsets would have other things to say to you.

 

[Grace-Like-Rain]

Burka.
The answer is a burka, with a head covering with eyeslits.
- That is what all christian women should wear.....

I could totally rock a burka.

 

[Married_Richenbrachen]

This is silly. While you both make some good points, you need to stop throwing stones at each other (example: this last post is just you saying extreme things to bait him). I think the women who had to wear corsets would have other things to say to you.

I'm sure the men who have to wear suits and ties would have similar things to say as the women who wore corsets, but again, I'm not even suggesting corsets, or suits and ties. Just clothes that are clothes and not underwear. The reason for clothes is to cover our nakedness - if we're going to use them, let's use them for what they were designed for.

And I'm not really trying to bait anyone - I just wanted to elaborate on his point, that we are indeed worlds apart. Almost polar opposites, if you will.

As I said initially, the answer to this subject should be obvious. If the answer is not obvious to anyone, I would say the reason is because such a one is looking to his own interests, rather than to the interests of others, or to the will of Christ. I don't think we have to go the extreme of burquas, but let's use clothes for what they were designed to achieve.

 

[Tintin]

Okay, fair enough, but underwear? I don't know where you live but here in South Australia many people dress fairly modestly.

 

[Misty77]

You're probably right. Hence the need for denominations. You keep going to your "liberal church" with its so-called "women's lib", newfangled "fancy doctrines" and "trendy youth", and I'll keep going to mine, which has some vestiges of respectability left.

I don't see why people are so negative about the older fashion senses, either. Probably in the 1800s, men knew how to dress like men, and women like women. You call that oppression - I call it liberty.

Considering women and nonwhites had little to no rights in the 1800s (at least in the States; I forget the exact dates for the UK), you are the only demographic that would view it as a time for liberty. In my country, even rape within marriage was not legally recognized until the 1970s. That was a victory of the women's movement, not the Christians. With predominantly European men interpreting and teaching scripture for a couple of millennia, truth had gotten a bit lopsided. And since it was in their favor, there was little incentive to make sure women and their more ethnically diverse brothers were properly protected and respected. It took largely (though not exclusively) secular movements for all people to experience similar freedoms.

 

[Praus]

Burka.
The answer is a burka, with a head covering with eyeslits.
- That is what all christian women should wear.....

I could totally rock a burka.

Song 1:6 Look not upon me, ...