Clothes vs Morals

[Sherryh]

A former staff member posted on facebook about the sad situation of clothes. I posted the sad situation is the moral situation in our colleges/churches. She took the post down and did not respond LOL!! It didn't surprise me it just made me mad all the years she preached about dressing right but forgot to teach about having morals. If you went to hac you know who I'm speaking about no names please. I know morals are taught at home but really many parents either never taught it or just let the kids do as they please.
I'm speaking to this group dress right and sleep with everyone. Which is what is happening in our churches across the country. Whats your opinion on this ?

 

[Ekklesian]

I'm speaking to this group dress right and sleep with everyone. Which is what is happening in our churches across the country. Whats your opinion on this ?

There's a wave of modestly apparelled hedonism in the churches? Do tell.

 

[illinoisguy]

In the 1980s I was in an IFB church where the ban on women's slacks was taught and obeyed, but the church secretary told me she knew of 9 teenage out-of-wedlock pregnancies in the congregation (and it wasn't a big church). The ban on women's slacks apparently has not had major impact on preventing immorality in the IFB movement - likewise, it didn't work in Josh Duggar's family where the girls could not wear slacks even around the house - that did not prevent Josh's immorality. The emphasis on women "dressing right" is convenient for purposes of shifting the blame from the guys to the girls, but just what it means to "dress right" is a matter of debatable opinion, since there are no dress codes specified in the New Testament except that married women were supposed to wear veils in church, 1 Corinthians 11.

In Matthew 5:27-30, Christ addressed the issue of sexual immorality, but He did not mention there or anywhere else that the way to deal with it was for the ladies to "dress right" and keep themselves covered up. He blamed it on the lustful men, saying they were the ones who needed to take responsibility for the problem, even to the extent of plucking out their own eyes.

Tamar was wearing a "long-sleeved garment" (NASB), a "long robe with sleeves" (ESV), "a long-sleeved dress that reached to the feet" (Revised Berkeley), 2 Samuel 13:18, but she got raped anyway. Anyone want to argue that Tamar wasn't "dressed right?" (See also 2 Samuel 13:19, Revised Berkeley, "the full-length dress she was wearing.)" Also, Tamar was still living at home with Daddy, but that's a different issue (patriarchy, Gothard, Vision Forum, etc).

 

[TonyHutsonComedian]

Well the great Jack Hyles always talked about how women should skirts and men shouldn't wear shorts or have facial hair etc. Plus Tony Hutson says only the big boys wear britches and the feminist guys wear shorts.

 

[tmjbog]

Well the great Jack Hyles always talked about how women should skirts and men shouldn't wear shorts or have facial hair etc. Plus Tony Hutson says only the big boys wear britches and the feminist guys wear shorts.

My former church which is of the Hyles flavor has always had a beardless staff until recently. One of the older assistant pastors grew a beard and in a very short period of time almost the entire staff had beards.

 

[Walt]

A former staff member posted on facebook about the sad situation of clothes. I posted the sad situation is the moral situation in our colleges/churches. She took the post down and did not respond LOL!! It didn't surprise me it just made me mad all the years she preached about dressing right but forgot to teach about having morals. If you went to hac you know who I'm speaking about no names please. I know morals are taught at home but really many parents either never taught it or just let the kids do as they please.
I'm speaking to this group dress right and sleep with everyone. Which is what is happening in our churches across the country. Whats your opinion on this ?

It's easy to teach a list of 'standards' than to teach people to have a relationship with Jesus Christ. I feel for young people growing up in an environment that merely teaches comformity to the authority's 'standards' and neglects to emphasis that relationship. Many of them just said the magic spell to get them to heaven (the 'sinner's prayer), and have never been changed.

 

[Walt]

In the 1980s I was in an IFB church where the ban on women's slacks was taught and obeyed, but the church secretary told me she knew of 9 teenage out-of-wedlock pregnancies in the congregation (and it wasn't a big church). The ban on women's slacks apparently has not had major impact on preventing immorality in the IFB movement - likewise, it didn't work in Josh Duggar's family where the girls could not wear slacks even around the house - that did not prevent Josh's immorality. The emphasis on women "dressing right" is convenient for purposes of shifting the blame from the guys to the girls, but just what it means to "dress right" is a matter of debatable opinion, since there are no dress codes specified in the New Testament except that married women were supposed to wear veils in church, 1 Corinthians 11.

In Matthew 5:27-30, Christ addressed the issue of sexual immorality, but He did not mention there or anywhere else that the way to deal with it was for the ladies to "dress right" and keep themselves covered up. He blamed it on the lustful men, saying they were the ones who needed to take responsibility for the problem, even to the extent of plucking out their own eyes.

Tamar was wearing a "long-sleeved garment" (NASB), a "long robe with sleeves" (ESV), "a long-sleeved dress that reached to the feet" (Revised Berkeley), 2 Samuel 13:18, but she got raped anyway. Anyone want to argue that Tamar wasn't "dressed right?" (See also 2 Samuel 13:19, Revised Berkeley, "the full-length dress she was wearing.)" Also, Tamar was still living at home with Daddy, but that's a different issue (patriarchy, Gothard, Vision Forum, etc).

Well said!
There is a very evil tendency for lustful men to blame the women for their dress, when the fault lies with the men.
But this is not an either/or situation... men must work at controlling their thoughts, and women need to dress per the Scriptures.
There is a tendency now to go overboard the other way... women claim that they should be able to wear whatever they want and it's the men's fault if they lust... this is wrong, too. There ARE such a things as seductive women -- temptresses, who use their body and their dress to cause men to go astray.

 

[sword]

It's a mistake to believe having strict dress standards assures high moral standards, they are not mutually exclusive in any way.
Everyone has a dress standards: businesses, organizations, churches, even homes. Some dress standards are for safety, some are for modesty, some are for corporate image, but we all have standards.
Its up to each business, organization, church, and even home to decide what standard is best for them. I think it's silly to imply that dressing a particular way will assure that a person will live a moral life and I have never heard someone imply that if you dress in a particular way it will assure you will behave in a moral way. Pastors, teachers and individuals will interpret differently what they believe the bible teaches is appropriate dress standards, but we all have a minimum standard for dress. Same goes for what kind of music is appropriate for a Christian, we all have different standards for music but we all have a standard. I think we could all agree that a band that openly worships Satan and glorifies him in their music would be below the minimum standard for a Christian?

I believe most IFB churches, who oppose women wearing pants, use the Old Testament verse Deuteronomy 22:5 as their guide for their dress standards.
Deuteronomy 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.
Some might also look to 1 Timothy 2:9 (assuming you think pants on women are immodest) as a guide.

On matters of music and basic dress standards I always try to respect peoples right to have a different opinion than I do.

 

[sword]

Well said Walt.
I have always been taught to watch for girls who dress seductively and in a provocative manner and to avoid them. This youthful advice has served me well all these years. The story in Proverbs 7 comes to mind.
Like Walt said, this does not excuse men for not controlling their thoughts. I have found it best to quickly look away when I see someone immodestly dressed and "think on these things" as Paul teaches us in Philippians 4:8. Thinking about your lovely wife, your wonderful daughters and your amazing grandkids will go a long way in refocusing your thoughts. We all have human weakness but we are mandated in the bible to control those weaknesses.

 

[Walt]

I think it's silly to imply that dressing a particular way will assure that a person will live a moral life and I have never heard someone imply that if you dress in a particular way it will assure you will behave in a moral way.

I agree with what you wrote, mostly: I HAVE heard people say that they have seen the same people behave better when they are "dressed up" -- but it is true that how one chooses to dress not affect their morals... as I pastor I respect says... modesty is a heart issue. One can behave immodestly even while meeting the strictest dress code.

 

[tmjbog]

It's easy to teach a list of 'standards' than to teach people to have a relationship with Jesus Christ. I feel for young people growing up in an environment that merely teaches comformity to the authority's 'standards' and neglects to emphasis that relationship. Many of them just said the magic spell to get them to heaven (the 'sinner's prayer), and have never been changed.

I read a book a while back that spoke on that subject. It was called called Robots and Rebels. Spoke of fundamentalism will ultimately cause one to either blindly follow any and all rules given out by the leader or rebel against it with the danger of eventually rejecting Christ along with the Fundamentalist ways. The book also discussed that part of the reason for the rules and standards are that the easy believism soul winning means the churches are filled with unsaved men who are not led by the Holy Spirit.

 

[Walt]

I read a book a while back that spoke on that subject. It was called called Robots and Rebels. Spoke of fundamentalism will ultimately cause one to either blindly follow any and all rules given out by the leader or rebel against it with the danger of eventually rejecting Christ along with the Fundamentalist ways. The book also discussed that part of the reason for the rules and standards are that the easy believism soul winning means the churches are filled with unsaved men who are not led by the Holy Spirit.

Sounds good to me!

 

[sword]

I read a book a while back that spoke on that subject. It was called called Robots and Rebels. Spoke of fundamentalism will ultimately cause one to either blindly follow any and all rules given out by the leader or rebel against it with the danger of eventually rejecting Christ along with the Fundamentalist ways. The book also discussed that part of the reason for the rules and standards are that the easy believism soul winning means the churches are filled with unsaved men who are not led by the Holy Spirit.

Makes sense, but on the average I have not found that to be the case. I have found one has to come to a place where you decide what you believe and make it your own, not necessarily what the preacher preaches.. Just like at work I sometimes do more than the boss requires and sometimes I disagree with the boss, but I do it his way anyways. If the boss is right or wrong I'm good either way. I don't take everything the pastor preaches as from God but I do consider everything he preaches and compare it to the Bible. Sometimes it's just good advice for life, not necessarily something chapter and verse and my pastor will point that out. If you don't like what your pastor is preaching find a new pastor. If I think what the pastor is preaching is contrary to the Bible just I choose the Bible.
I do have a question, what is the alternative to easy believism. A person must realize they are a sinner on their way to Hell and in the need of a savior. They must repent of their sins and trust in what Jesus did on the cross to get them to Heaven. Romans 10:9 seems like easy believism, what is the alternative. are there many more steps I was never told about. I agree not everyone who professes to be a Christian will be in Heaven but Gods Plan for Salvation is very easy.
I don't believe in 123 repeat after me but if they realize they are in need of a savior and sincerely trust in Jesus that seem pretty easy. I had heard it many times, but one day I truly realized I needed to be saved and the rest was very very easy for me, Jesus had already did the hard part. That's how I got saved, that's how my wife got saved and that's how my children got saved.

 

[tmjbog]

I do have a question, what is the alternative to easy believism. A person must realize they are a sinner on their way to Hell and in the need of a savior. They must repent of their sins and trust in what Jesus did on the cross to get them to Heaven. Romans 10:9 seems like easy believism, what is the alternative

Biblical salvation. Sin was not minimized in the Bible. The sales pitch I've witnessed with many fundamentalist churches involves asking if they have ever lied and the salesman also confesses he has lied in the past and so they are both sinners. We both know that in nearly every case lying was not the worst of the sins committed by either party, but in making the "sale" sin and repentance is minimized. I've been soul winning a witnessed a lady get "saved" but you could tell by the look on her face she had no interest-she simply surmised it was the quickest way to get these people off her porch. I had some Catholic friends one time and I brought a missionary to their house. He preached at them and they all knelt at their couch and got "saved". They all told me later they only knelt and prayed because they felt it would have been rude not to do what the missionary was requesting. A senior in the youth group at my former church one time played basketball for souls. If this senior and his two friends won than their opponents would have to pray for salvation. There was a contest in the youth group to see who could get the most saved, and yes this senior won the contest. On occasion there may be an instance when a person has been dealt with by the Holy Spirit and is just waiting for someone to come and tell them the way to God. In most instances, though, it has become all about manipulating a person to praying the prayer and chalking them up as a win. Seldom any follow up or concern in probing deeper to see if they are truly a "new creation".

 

[TidesofTruth]

Well the great Jack Hyles always talked about how women should skirts and men shouldn't wear shorts or have facial hair etc. Plus Tony Hutson says only the big boys wear britches and the feminist guys wear shorts.

You're a Moron. Bro. Hyles did not preach against men wearing shorts nor did he preach against beards. You haven't a clue about what you are talking about. The high school basketball teams always wore shorts and some years in the 70's, by today's standards, were immodest. Unisex styles has always been his baileywick and come to think of it most of those sermons proved to be prophetic.

As to the OP, yes standards will be challenged when there is no moral underpinning. My solution though would not to dissolve the standards but to bring the moral failures to a halt through church discipline, discipleship, restoration and if need be disunion.

 

[TonyHutsonComedian]

You're a Moron. Bro. Hyles did not preach against men wearing shorts nor did he preach against beards. You haven't a clue about what you are talking about. The high school basketball teams always wore shorts and some years in the 70's, by today's standards, were immodest. Unisex styles has always been his baileywick and come to think of it most of those sermons proved to be prophetic.

As to the OP, yes standards will be challenged when there is no moral underpinning. My solution though would not to dissolve the standards but to bring the moral failures to a halt through church discipline, discipleship, restoration and if need be disunion.

You're an idiot