Christian Attire - The 90% Rule

Ekklesian said:
It doesn't describe the attire of a harlot at all despite the literary genre, and, despite the genre, if that kind of attire didn't exist, or the reader had no idea what would generally characterize that attire, the verse would be meaningless.

But it can be used to counter the arguments against nature that say these things are only in the mind and not universal.

Doth not even nature teach you?

It's like the verse in the same literature that says God hates a proud look with no description of what constitutes a proud look. The position of one's brows, the tilt of the head, the shape of the mouth, etc. But everyone sure knows it when he sees it. And he knows it by nature.

We can drop the pretenses when it comes to the character of one's clothing. Two indisputable and universal things about the 'attire of a harlot': It's designed to catch the eye, and to allure. And everyone knows it when he sees it, and he knows it by nature.
Click to expand...
How does this response relate to what I said?
 
Ekklesian said:
It doesn't describe the attire of a harlot at all despite the literary genre, and, despite the genre, if that kind of attire didn't exist, or the reader had no idea what would generally characterize that attire, the verse would be meaningless.

But it can be used to counter the arguments against nature that say these things are only in the mind and not universal.

Doth not even nature teach you?

It's like the verse in the same literature that says God hates a proud look with no description of what constitutes a proud look. The position of one's brows, the tilt of the head, the shape of the mouth, etc. But everyone sure knows it when he sees it. And he knows it by nature.

We can drop the pretenses when it comes to the character of one's clothing. Two indisputable and universal things about the 'attire of a harlot': It's designed to catch the eye, and to allure. And everyone knows it when he sees it, and he knows it by nature.
Click to expand...
Allure? I disagree. The attire of a harlot in that day was to identify her as a harlot. Not to allure sexually.
 
ALAYMAN said:
How does this response relate to what I said?
Click to expand...
You, in essence, were saying there's really no such thing as the attire of an harlot because there's no Scriptural definition of it. You made some nebulous appeal to the literary genre of Proverbs as if that made your case.

I said basically you're wrong, and used an example from the same literary genre to prove it.
 
Ekklesian said:
You, in essence, were saying there's really no such thing as the attire of an harlot
Click to expand...

No, I didn’t say that. I said the passage isn’t about defining what articles Solomon intended to warn his son about.
Ekklesian said:
because there's no Scriptural definition of it.
Click to expand...

Go ahead and provide your Scriptural citations for which articles are that which make one a harlot.
Ekklesian said:
You made some nebulous appeal to the literary genre of Proverbs as if that made your case.
Click to expand...
Making proper distinctions in Scripture is simply employing sound hermeneutics. If you want to employ wisdom literature to compose a list of forbidden clothing articles you need to return to HAC to ply your ministerial trade.
 
Ekklesian said:
So you agree the main characteristics thereof are universal, and known by nature. It certainly seemed you were saying just the opposite.
Click to expand...
It’s obvious to me bc there’s no list of clothing that God seems to have left it to the believer to decide, not me to decide for others or for pastors to decide for members.

It’s that simple.
 
Ekklesian said:
So you agree the main characteristics thereof are universal, and known by nature. It certainly seemed you were saying just the opposite.
Click to expand...
I agree that you intentionally miss the point even if it were to impale you. Ransom pointed out the obvious fact to you that sexual availability of a harlot can be signaled by varying degrees of undress, or style/ostentatious dress. So the point of the passage is not too make a list of unacceptable clothing articles, but rather to warn a young man not to engage in illicit behavior with a person who is plying their trade.
 
Last edited:
ALAYMAN said:
I agree that you intentionally miss the point even if we’re to impale you. Ransom pointed out the obvious fact to you that sexual availability of a harlot can be signaled by varying degrees of undress, or style/ostentatious dress. So the point of the passage is not too make a list of unacceptable clothing articles, but rather to warn a young man not to engage in illicit behavior with a person who is plying their trade.
Click to expand...
*sigh* Again. I get your point. And it's nonsensical. But it appears that I'm incapable of getting through to you. I think this is a discussion you should have with the missus. I'm certain if you take her to the mall, she could tell you who's dressin' like a ho an' who ain't.

Don't you think?

See ya.
 
Oh I understand you fine. You state “universality”, in doing so you overstate the case, saying more than God says. My wife is fallible, and subjective. Scripture not so much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top