|
Post by fred on May 23, 2011 20:26:46 GMT -5
FreespiritHi FS! Modesty is determined by your culture. G'day, bert, we've been missing you. Yes you are right - modesty is determined by culture. In the case of the friends and workers, modesty is determined by their sub-culture, not the culture of the general world around them.
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 23, 2011 21:51:23 GMT -5
Just guessing that the hair, dress, make-up, and jewelry rules are the least of a godly woman. Something like the Pharisees that would tithe mint and such, but leave off the weightier matters. The weightier matters for the "professing" woman might be that which makes a woman "possessing". Good points, Greg. Perhaps the bun/skirt combo is considered a minimum requirement. But, I would put forth: When and why is it even considered a "requirement"? Did Jesus command it? Peter and Paul may have recommended it or something LIKE it, but did Jesus require it and does God require it? Perhaps this goes back to that basic question that Paul and others have asked: "Lord, what would You have me to do?" And the answer is.................? Love one another.By this shall all men know that you are my disciples. Follow my commandments. Love Me and love others as I have loved you. Keep my Words. Obey my commandments. Follow Me. etc. Christ was concerned about what the Pharisees were so focused on-while neglected the MOST important thing. We can be guilty of that too. Peter was concerned that women more more focused on adorning their outward bodies than on the state of their inward-the soul; MORE concerned with how they appeared physically than with their spirit. Peter did not just address the issue of putting on gold(jewelry) and plaiting the hair, but he also mentioned APPAREL(clothing). 1 Peter 3,vs.3-5 These verses have been interpretted to mean godly women should NOT wear jewelry, but what about APPAREL? Are godly women not supposed to wear any apparel? Of course not. Yet, I think what Peter was getting at there was to not ONLY concern oneself with your apparel, and putting things on your body to enhance your looks: rather-we should be most concerned and worry the most about the state of you soul. And "adorn" (metaphor) yourself with meekness, and quiet spirit. So then, HOW does one "adorn themselves with a meek and quiet spirit?" The BEST way to do that is to have a Christ-like spirit. And the BEST way to have a Christ-like Spirit is to actually have a Spirit of Christ, the Holy Spirit dwell within you; the inhabit your body as God's Temple. 1 Peter 3vs3-5: Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting of the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands.There is so much depth to these verses besides "no jewelry". -bop WOW!! *like* In response to Greg: Jesus did say the Pharisees were too careful about some tithes and left out important things, but he also said they should do the important things and not leave the other undone! ...for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
|
|
|
Post by freespirit on May 23, 2011 22:20:08 GMT -5
Hi FS! Modesty is determined by your culture. Bert, stop trying to get the women you go to meeting with to wear skinny jeans and a tube top! Men!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2011 22:36:09 GMT -5
Well, women could be adorned as Paul suggested in 1 Timothy 2:10 But (which becometh women professing godliness ) with good works ...
could lead to an Emperor's new clothes kind of outcome, however.
|
|
|
Post by burdenofproof on May 23, 2011 22:44:14 GMT -5
Good points, Greg. Perhaps the bun/skirt combo is considered a minimum requirement. But, I would put forth: When and why is it even considered a "requirement"? Did Jesus command it? Peter and Paul may have recommended it or something LIKE it, but did Jesus require it and does God require it? Perhaps this goes back to that basic question that Paul and others have asked: "Lord, what would You have me to do?" And the answer is.................? Love one another.By this shall all men know that you are my disciples. Follow my commandments. Love Me and love others as I have loved you. Keep my Words. Obey my commandments. Follow Me. etc. Christ was concerned about what the Pharisees were so focused on-while neglected the MOST important thing. We can be guilty of that too. Peter was concerned that women more more focused on adorning their outward bodies than on the state of their inward-the soul; MORE concerned with how they appeared physically than with their spirit. Peter did not just address the issue of putting on gold(jewelry) and plaiting the hair, but he also mentioned APPAREL(clothing). 1 Peter 3,vs.3-5 These verses have been interpretted to mean godly women should NOT wear jewelry, but what about APPAREL? Are godly women not supposed to wear any apparel? Of course not. Yet, I think what Peter was getting at there was to not ONLY concern oneself with your apparel, and putting things on your body to enhance your looks: rather-we should be most concerned and worry the most about the state of you soul. And "adorn" (metaphor) yourself with meekness, and quiet spirit. So then, HOW does one "adorn themselves with a meek and quiet spirit?" The BEST way to do that is to have a Christ-like spirit. And the BEST way to have a Christ-like Spirit is to actually have a Spirit of Christ, the Holy Spirit dwell within you; the inhabit your body as God's Temple. 1 Peter 3vs3-5: Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting of the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands.There is so much depth to these verses besides "no jewelry". -bop WOW!! *like* In response to Greg: Jesus did say the Pharisees were too careful about some tithes and left out important things, but he also said they should do the important things and not leave the other undone! ...for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. Thanks for the feedback, and yes, Jesus was saying not to leave the other undone...was He referring to bun and skirt? No. I think we all know that the bun/skirt combo was never commanded or required by Jesus or God...nor is it openly stated by friends/workers that it is a requirement. However, it is one of those "unwritten rules" that is very much a reality for professing women and the manner in which it is "enforced" is not directly or outright honestly. It is alluded to and insinuated that IF a woman is really and truly professing and possessing she WILL wear a bun/skirt at all times-unless there is an 'acceptable' reason not to.....she WILL arrive at the same conviction as the sister workers....(even though she may not be a sister worker). fwiw-bop
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 23, 2011 22:47:09 GMT -5
Thanks for the feedback, and yes, Jesus was saying not to leave the other undone...was He referring to bun and skirt? No. I think we all know that the bun/skirt combo was never commanded or required by Jesus or God...nor is it openly stated by friends/workers that it is a requirement. However, it is one of those "unwritten rules" that is very much a reality for professing women and the manner in which it is "enforced" is not directly or outright honestly. It is alluded to and insinuated that IF a woman is really and truly professing and possessing she WILL wear a bun/skirt at all times-unless there is an 'acceptable' reason not to.....she WILL arrive at the same conviction as the sister workers....(even though she may not be a sister worker). fwiw-bop I wasn't, of course, pretending that he meant buns and skirts, but that he didn't minimize the importance of minor things.
|
|
|
Post by burdenofproof on May 23, 2011 23:05:41 GMT -5
Thanks for the feedback, and yes, Jesus was saying not to leave the other undone...was He referring to bun and skirt? No. I think we all know that the bun/skirt combo was never commanded or required by Jesus or God...nor is it openly stated by friends/workers that it is a requirement. However, it is one of those "unwritten rules" that is very much a reality for professing women and the manner in which it is "enforced" is not directly or outright honestly. It is alluded to and insinuated that IF a woman is really and truly professing and possessing she WILL wear a bun/skirt at all times-unless there is an 'acceptable' reason not to.....she WILL arrive at the same conviction as the sister workers....(even though she may not be a sister worker). fwiw-bop I wasn't, of course, pretending that he meant buns and skirts, but that he didn't minimize the importance of minor things. Good emy...you had me worried there for a second... Sometimes it is alluded to that those "minor things" are things like buns and skirts and the other unwritten rules that could pertain to men and/or women, workers and/or friends in the fellowship. fwiw-bop
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2011 0:42:00 GMT -5
Good points, Greg. Perhaps the bun/skirt combo is considered a minimum requirement. But, I would put forth: When and why is it even considered a "requirement"? Did Jesus command it? Peter and Paul may have recommended it or something LIKE it, but did Jesus require it and does God require it? Perhaps this goes back to that basic question that Paul and others have asked: "Lord, what would You have me to do?" And the answer is.................? Love one another.By this shall all men know that you are my disciples. Follow my commandments. Love Me and love others as I have loved you. Keep my Words. Obey my commandments. Follow Me. etc. Christ was concerned about what the Pharisees were so focused on-while neglected the MOST important thing. We can be guilty of that too. Peter was concerned that women more more focused on adorning their outward bodies than on the state of their inward-the soul; MORE concerned with how they appeared physically than with their spirit. Peter did not just address the issue of putting on gold(jewelry) and plaiting the hair, but he also mentioned APPAREL(clothing). 1 Peter 3,vs.3-5 These verses have been interpretted to mean godly women should NOT wear jewelry, but what about APPAREL? Are godly women not supposed to wear any apparel? Of course not. Yet, I think what Peter was getting at there was to not ONLY concern oneself with your apparel, and putting things on your body to enhance your looks: rather-we should be most concerned and worry the most about the state of you soul. And "adorn" (metaphor) yourself with meekness, and quiet spirit. So then, HOW does one "adorn themselves with a meek and quiet spirit?" The BEST way to do that is to have a Christ-like spirit. And the BEST way to have a Christ-like Spirit is to actually have a Spirit of Christ, the Holy Spirit dwell within you; the inhabit your body as God's Temple. 1 Peter 3vs3-5: Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting of the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands.There is so much depth to these verses besides "no jewelry". -bop WOW!! *like* In response to Greg: Jesus did say the Pharisees were too careful about some tithes and left out important things, but he also said they should do the important things and not leave the other undone! ...for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. In my mind, God is a complete and comprehensive God. He is a God in which all things are possible. He is a God that wouldn't have us leave things incomplete, but would see His Work done to completion...this means not leaving things out that should be included. This means, finishing what should be finished and this means worshiping Him with our whole life-not just in word or deed or in manner of dress/appearance. But with our whole being-our hearts/minds/souls and our bodies as His dwelling place. When we can really "get" that our bodies are His Temple, I believe it changes a lot of what we DO...what we say...what kind of spirit and attitude we show forth-EVERYTHING. When a bride gets "ready" for the wedding, she attends to EVERY detail: Her hair, her skin, her dress, her jewelry, her head covering or veil, her hose, her shoes, her garter and other undergarments, her nails, her make-up, her teeth, her lips/smile, her body-she wants EVERYTHING to be perfect for her groom and her wedding. But she also attends to many other things: the wedding ceremony, the reception and feast, the music, the dancing, the receiving of all the guests, the invitation, the cake, the pictures, the decorations, the mints, the punch, the food, the bridesmaids and groomsmen and flower girl and ring bearer, the wedding official, the guest book, EVERYTHING. Everything is SPECIAL for that special event-nothing overlooked or undone-if something gets overlooked or undone, it could ruin her wedding! There are LOT of unknowns/circumstances that can ruin a wedding, and is sad when that is that case. But sometimes, it's the way one handles the disappointments that ruin the wedding, not the negative occurence itself.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2011 0:56:43 GMT -5
I wasn't, of course, pretending that he meant buns and skirts, but that he didn't minimize the importance of minor things. Good emy...you had me worried there for a second... Sometimes it is alluded to that those "minor things" are things like buns and skirts and the other unwritten rules that could pertain to men and/or women, workers and/or friends in the fellowship. fwiw-bop hmmmm........"minor things"? As opposed to major things? Who decides what is major and what is minor? And who decides what is "required"? I would think that anything that is essential or required is major. I'll take it on faith that the commandments of Christ are the major things....
|
|
A10D
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by A10D on May 24, 2011 4:43:47 GMT -5
Thanks for the feedback, and yes, Jesus was saying not to leave the other undone...was He referring to bun and skirt? No. I think we all know that the bun/skirt combo was never commanded or required by Jesus or God...nor is it openly stated by friends/workers that it is a requirement. However, it is one of those "unwritten rules" that is very much a reality for professing women and the manner in which it is "enforced" is not directly or outright honestly. It is alluded to and insinuated that IF a woman is really and truly professing and possessing she WILL wear a bun/skirt at all times-unless there is an 'acceptable' reason not to.....she WILL arrive at the same conviction as the sister workers....(even though she may not be a sister worker). fwiw-bop I have long hair and wear a skirt/dress at all times, this is a personal conviction, I arrived at this conviction because of scripture. I have been asked more than once where I attend church, I am not embarrassed by my appearance because it is in my heart. I had these convictions before attending the Friends & Workers gospel meetings.
|
|
|
Post by fred on May 24, 2011 5:52:42 GMT -5
And then there are some who have read the same scriptures and were convicted of their liberty in Christ to cut their hair and wear garments with compartments for each leg. These women ought to respect your decision in such a non-essential matter just as you would respect their decision.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2011 12:43:03 GMT -5
Thanks for the feedback, and yes, Jesus was saying not to leave the other undone...was He referring to bun and skirt? No. I think we all know that the bun/skirt combo was never commanded or required by Jesus or God...nor is it openly stated by friends/workers that it is a requirement. However, it is one of those "unwritten rules" that is very much a reality for professing women and the manner in which it is "enforced" is not directly or outright honestly. It is alluded to and insinuated that IF a woman is really and truly professing and possessing she WILL wear a bun/skirt at all times-unless there is an 'acceptable' reason not to.....she WILL arrive at the same conviction as the sister workers....(even though she may not be a sister worker). fwiw-bop I have long hair and wear a skirt/dress at all times, this is a personal conviction, I arrived at this conviction because of scripture. I have been asked more than once where I attend church, I am not embarrassed by my appearance because it is in my heart. I had these convictions before attending the Friends & Workers gospel meetings. thanks for sharing, but you come across as a bit defensive .. i do not think anyone accused you of being "embarrassed by your appearance" .. or at least the subject of embarrassment was not brought up in this thread .. i don't think that how a person chooses to dress is something that should or should NOT be a matter of respect .. rather we should just treat others with respect: period. regardless of how they dress .. we should love others: period - regardless of how they look .. are some people easier to love than others? Yes, of course, but according to Christ, we are to love the ones that are difficult to love just as much as we love the ones that are "easy" to love .. we are to love the ones that do not even love us just as much as we love the ones that DO love us .. we should love a complete stranger we meet at the dorm at convention, regardless of who they know or what they look like, even if they don't look like they are "professing" .. this is what Christ taught/commanded and exemplified. Do i love you? Yes, I love you a fellow human being, even though I've never met you in person .. what you wear does not impact that and your conviction about what you wear does not impact that .. i would accept you either way ..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2011 12:54:15 GMT -5
And then there are some who have read the same scriptures and were convicted of their liberty in Christ to cut their hair and wear garments with compartments for each leg. These women ought to respect your decision in such a non-essential matter just as you would respect their decision. .. i agree .. mutual respect .. but that does not really happen inside the fellowship .. meaning .. people who do NOT feel convicted to wear a bun and skirt everyday are not respected .. whereas the one's who are convicted demand/command respect .. and maybe they get it too .. however .. respect that is "forced":(you should respect me, because i have this conviction) is that really genuine? true, genuine, respect is something that is earned and grows as you get to know people .. yet in the meantime, we can treat others with respect, regardless ..there are various reasons why we might respect someone .. sure, we respect certain people who have "place" or "position" .. as a matter of respecting the "office" .. but on a personal level .. why should i respect someone just because of what they wear or what they don't wear. i can think of reasons of more depth to respect them .. I don't expect people to respect me just because I don't wear a bun and skirt everyday .. that seems a little lofty on my part, but also it concerns a surface things; my outward appearance .. i would rather be respected for things that i DO that are worthy of respect, .. such as how I treat other people when i interract with them or my skills .. . in fact, I don't expect people to respect me at all .. but if they do, for whatever reason, then i guess I'll accept that .. it's nice to be treated with respect, i suppose even if i don't feel i've really done anything to earn it .. when people start praising me for this or that and how wonderful i am, i get a little uncomfortable .. maybe because i think to myself: i am only a vessel .. a frail vessel .. if they only knew my weaknesses that i have overcome and need to overcome everyday, they may not think i am so great ..
|
|
A10D
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by A10D on May 24, 2011 13:25:23 GMT -5
I have long hair and wear a skirt/dress at all times, this is a personal conviction, I arrived at this conviction because of scripture. I have been asked more than once where I attend church, I am not embarrassed by my appearance because it is in my heart. I had these convictions before attending the Friends & Workers gospel meetings. thanks for sharing, but you come across as a bit defensive .. i do not think anyone accused you of being "embarrassed by your appearance" .. or at least the subject of embarrassment was not brought up in this thread .. i don't think that how a person chooses to dress is something that should or should NOT be a matter of respect .. rather we should just treat others with respect: period. regardless of how they dress .. we should love others: period - regardless of how they look .. are some people easier to love than others? Yes, of course, but according to Christ, we are to love the ones that are difficult to love just as much as we love the ones that are "easy" to love .. we are to love the ones that do not even love us just as much as we love the ones that DO love us .. we should love a complete stranger we meet at the dorm at convention, regardless of who they know or what they look like, even if they don't look like they are "professing" .. this is what Christ taught/commanded and exemplified. Do i love you? Yes, I love you a fellow human being, even though I've never met you in person .. what you wear does not impact that and your conviction about what you wear does not impact that .. i would accept you either way .. My point was, I hold my own conviction and do not hold it for anyone else. I am not "professing" of the friends and workers fellowship but by appearance it could be assumed that I am when I attend a gospel meeting. I am not embarrassed of my outward look among that assumption in or out of a meeting. The church I attend on Sunday morning does not hold any conviction of clothing attire. ETA...or hair conviction.
|
|
|
Post by burdenofproof on May 24, 2011 13:31:23 GMT -5
I have long hair and wear a skirt/dress at all times, this is a personal conviction, I arrived at this conviction because of scripture. I have been asked more than once where I attend church, I am not embarrassed by my appearance because it is in my heart. I had these convictions before attending the Friends & Workers gospel meetings. thanks for sharing, but you come across as a bit defensive .. i do not think anyone accused you of being "embarrassed by your appearance" .. or at least the subject of embarrassment was not brought up in this thread .. i don't think that how a person chooses to dress is something that should or should NOT be a matter of respect .. rather we should just treat others with respect: period. regardless of how they dress .. we should love others: period - regardless of how they look .. are some people easier to love than others? Yes, of course, but according to Christ, we are to love the ones that are difficult to love just as much as we love the ones that are "easy" to love .. we are to love the ones that do not even love us just as much as we love the ones that DO love us .. we should love a complete stranger we meet at the dorm at convention, regardless of who they know or what they look like, even if they don't look like they are "professing" .. this is what Christ taught/commanded and exemplified. Do i love you? Yes, I love you a fellow human being, even though I've never met you in person .. what you wear does not impact that and your conviction about what you wear does not impact that .. i would accept you either way .. Hmmm. Interesting exchange here, but it got me thinking: The reasons I love and respect my mother, who is a "pillar" in the fellowship and also adheres to the bun/skirt policy. It's debatable about whether she really feels convicted by God on it, but she has been wearing the same thing for some many years, I don't think it is a matter of conviction anymore as much as habitual. BUT-before I get too much into that, let me tell you why I love and respect her so much. It is NOT because of what she wears. It is because of WHO she is and what she DOES and how she loves and treats people. I respect her because of her work ethic, her skill, her kindness, her accomplishments and I respect her for the many trials and troubles she has overcome throughout her entire life, starting in childhood. I respect her for much of what she stands for:her strong faith in God; although I am not saying she is perfect, by no means. I love her for many reasons, not just because she is my mother who gave birth to me, but because she is the mother that I've known all my life who loves me and has done enriching things with me and has been a good example to me in many, many ways. fwiw-bop
|
|
|
Post by burdenofproof on May 24, 2011 13:38:28 GMT -5
And then there are some who have read the same scriptures and were convicted of their liberty in Christ to cut their hair and wear garments with compartments for each leg. These women ought to respect your decision in such a non-essential matter just as you would respect their decision. .. i agree .. mutual respect .. but that does not really happen inside the fellowship .. meaning .. people who do NOT feel convicted to wear a bun and skirt everyday are not respected .. whereas the one's who are convicted demand/command respect .. and maybe they get it too .. however .. respect that is "forced":(you should respect me, because i have this conviction) is that really genuine? true, genuine, respect is something that is earned and grows as you get to know people .. yet in the meantime, we can treat others with respect, regardless ..there are various reasons why we might respect someone .. sure, we respect certain people who have "place" or "position" .. as a matter of respecting the "office" .. but on a personal level .. why should i respect someone just because of what they wear or what they don't wear. i can think of reasons of more depth to respect them .. I don't expect people to respect me just because I don't wear a bun and skirt everyday .. that seems a little lofty on my part, but also it concerns a surface things; my outward appearance .. i would rather be respected for things that i DO that are worthy of respect, .. such as how I treat other people when i interract with them or my skills .. . in fact, I don't expect people to respect me at all .. but if they do, for whatever reason, then i guess I'll accept that .. it's nice to be treated with respect, i suppose even if i don't feel i've really done anything to earn it .. when people start praising me for this or that and how wonderful i am, i get a little uncomfortable .. maybe because i think to myself: i am only a vessel .. a frail vessel .. if they only knew my weaknesses that i have overcome and need to overcome everyday, they may not think i am so great .. God is not a respecter of persons...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2011 14:30:38 GMT -5
WOW!! *like* In response to Greg: Jesus did say the Pharisees were too careful about some tithes and left out important things, but he also said they should do the important things and not leave the other undone! ...for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. In my mind, God is a complete and comprehensive God. He is a God in which all things are possible. He is a God that wouldn't have us leave things incomplete, but would see His Work done to completion...this means not leaving things out that should be included. This means, finishing what should be finished and this means worshiping Him with our whole life-not just in word or deed or in manner of dress/appearance. But with our whole being-our hearts/minds/souls and our bodies as His dwelling place. When we can really "get" that our bodies are His Temple, I believe it changes a lot of what we DO...what we say...what kind of spirit and attitude we show forth-EVERYTHING. When a bride gets "ready" for the wedding, she attends to EVERY detail: Her hair, her skin, her dress, her jewelry, her head covering or veil, her hose, her shoes, her garter and other undergarments, her nails, her make-up, her teeth, her lips/smile, her body-she wants EVERYTHING to be perfect for her groom and her wedding. But she also attends to many other things: the wedding ceremony, the reception and feast, the music, the dancing, the receiving of all the guests, the invitation, the cake, the pictures, the decorations, the mints, the punch, the food, the bridesmaids and groomsmen and flower girl and ring bearer, the wedding official, the guest book, EVERYTHING. Everything is SPECIAL for that special event-nothing overlooked or undone-if something gets overlooked or undone, it could ruin her wedding! There are LOT of unknowns/circumstances that can ruin a wedding, and is sad when that is that case. But sometimes, it's the way one handles the disappointments that ruin the wedding, not the negative occurence itself. sbs- .. you forgot the FLOWERS ! how could you ..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2011 14:32:51 GMT -5
thanks for sharing, but you come across as a bit defensive .. i do not think anyone accused you of being "embarrassed by your appearance" .. or at least the subject of embarrassment was not brought up in this thread .. i don't think that how a person chooses to dress is something that should or should NOT be a matter of respect .. rather we should just treat others with respect: period. regardless of how they dress .. we should love others: period - regardless of how they look .. are some people easier to love than others? Yes, of course, but according to Christ, we are to love the ones that are difficult to love just as much as we love the ones that are "easy" to love .. we are to love the ones that do not even love us just as much as we love the ones that DO love us .. we should love a complete stranger we meet at the dorm at convention, regardless of who they know or what they look like, even if they don't look like they are "professing" .. this is what Christ taught/commanded and exemplified. Do i love you? Yes, I love you a fellow human being, even though I've never met you in person .. what you wear does not impact that and your conviction about what you wear does not impact that .. i would accept you either way .. My point was, I hold my own conviction and do not hold it for anyone else. I am not "professing" of the friends and workers fellowship but by appearance it could be assumed that I am when I attend a gospel meeting. I am not embarrassed of my outward look among that assumption in or out of a meeting. The church I attend on Sunday morning does not hold any conviction of clothing attire. ETA...or hair conviction. ok .. thanx for the clarification .. uh .. i think i understand more what you were trying to say .. and I agree, you should not be embarrassed by your own convictions about wearing a bun and skirt everyday .. if that really is your true conviction from God, you should just feel good about it and right ..
|
|
|
Post by apple on May 24, 2011 15:22:31 GMT -5
Good grief, bop. Please tell us that professing women know that professing godliness is so much more than just wearing a bun and a skirt! For it would be a very sad day if that were the case...and sad if that is the only impression that others seeking for Christ get when they encounter a 'professing' woman. Well................if one did not know any better.....they may get that impression. But, I think that most professing people KNOW that professing godliness is much more than just wearing a bun and a skirt. Just as being a nun is much more than wearing a nun's habit! HOWEVER....Satan can get us coming or going...meaning, while thinking we are being "righteous" or dressing in a way that is "godly" and pleasing to the Lord, we could actually be deceived and mistaken and neglectful of other areas in our lives that are just as important if not MORE important. The way in which we dress is to a REFLECTION of what is on the inside, right? If so, then I think we really need to stop and think for ourselves about HOW Christ is COMPREHENSIVELY REFLECTED by us. "COMPREHENSIVE" meaning: Covering completely or broadly. Covering all possibilities. Is the bun/skirt combo the MOST godly way to appear? No, it's not. If that were so, then none of the men would be considered godly-appearing. No, it's not, because there are so many other factors beside a bun and skirt that can exude a Christ-like spirit or show that your body is indeed a Temple of God. There, does that explain what I mean a little better? Hope so. But someone may get the IMPRESSION that unless you have a bun and skirt as a female, you are not "professing godliness"....that is an attitude or judgement the many professing people have: (No bun and skirt? Oh, she must not be professing). -bop Ah but a nun chooses to become a nun and chooses what kind of nun she is to be.Each "nun group" has a different dress code, some more liberal in dress and lifestyle than others.Some do not have any uniform at all.The 2x2 woman does not get the choice- in most cases she does not choose to join the group but is born into it, she dresses slightly differently and she is "worldly" and she is obliged to adhere to a uniform regardless of being a lay person or not. I believe that the nuns habit is much more powerful a testimony than the skirt and bun.Anyone can buy a long skirt and put their hair up in a bun but with the habit there can be no confusion as to what the person is.A nun wears her faith openly, the meetings lady does not even though she thinks she does.Those who are not familar with the meetings will not understand the look meetings women have as standing for a faith, a certain belief, a community but a nun in a habit is recognised as a Christian woman of the Catholic church who has given up chance of a career, a husband and family for her faith because of her love of God so that she can help God's people(think about that- the workers only become workers because they feel obliged to, because they feel "called", it's not to do with love but duty).Sure to us in the meetings a bun and skirt is a sign of faith and of obedience to the workers & God but outsiders to not understand this and we tend to judge others' faith on the length of their skirts.We don't wear long skirts and buns as a testimony of our faith or as an outward reminder that we are God's & not to shame God by our actions.Nor do workers wear long skirts and buns as a sign of their giving up the chance of a career, marriage and family for God.While the meetings uniform is often modest, it is secular- shop bought clothes, fashionable, brand labels.Judging by clothes alone as passersby do, there is not much in even the most modest 2x2 woman to say that she is a Christian, to say that she is not conformed with the world (and nothing in the clothes of the 2x2 man at all). Someone mistook me for a nun and asked for prayers in a city centre.It was a very humbling experience and afterwards I realised that I never had that in the meetings attire- because by looks alone no passerby could recognise my faith.
|
|
|
Post by sherbear on May 24, 2011 17:14:37 GMT -5
How is modesty defined? From all that I can see scripturally it certainly does NOT mean that modesty would draw attention to oneself. Or to flaunt expensive garb to impress others. It does NOT mean that a woman must dress in dowdy out of fashion garb to draw attention to herself. To me that is not modesty! But "fashion" (and that is 100% defined by man and NOT God) has nothing to do with pleasing God. If a woman dresses to present herself as better than others or to sexually stimulate men that is NOT modest. But it does not mean she has to dress any differently from the current fashion of what is labeled "the world". Jeans for women are not immodest, makeup tastefully applied is not immodest, jewelry tastefully worn is not immodest. I believe what Paul was implying in the New Testament is that women were more preoccupied with their "looks" than their relationship with God and their internal spirit which should be a thing of beauty - a spirit that brings glory and honor to God. Why did Jesus Himself tell us not to worry about the things we wore? When people become so preoccupied with the trivial issues of outward appearance it's nothing more than nonsense and probably most foolish in the eyes of God. The Bible I read says absolutely nothing about the specific style of clothing women should wear. If you can find this please share it. The only thing I see is that women are to be modest. So WHO defined modesty by the world's standards?? Oh the wisdom of man is foolishness with God!
Additionally if you will seriously take the time to study scripture instead of hand picking verses here and there that tickle your fancy you will clearly understand that long hair for women was very specific to that time and the "customs" of the people at that time. It was not a rule God placed on women. Again, if you can find anything scriptural where Jesus mentioned anything about women's hair needing to be LONG and men's hair needing to be short, please share this. I have studied this subject in depth an cannot find a trace of this - once again "MAN'S IDEAS".
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on May 24, 2011 17:49:01 GMT -5
One addition to apple's post, I may be wrong here but I understand that a nun does not become a nun wearing a habit overnight. A woman (not a girl) goes through a process to become a nun. Her first vows are not her final vows, and her initial vows do not begin with a change of clothing. I may be mistaken, but a nun only dons the habit after her final vows. This is a process, and there is no shame in a woman deciding not to take her final vows. Also, too, a woman understands what her vows mean before she takes them (schooling and instruction required).
Kinda different from professing where standing to your feet means you have an instant dress code and no firm idea about spiritual matters.
|
|
|
Post by emerald on May 24, 2011 17:54:13 GMT -5
Apple, I don't agree with you that a worker offers out a sense of duty. Many dear friends that I have had over the years that have offered for the work do it out of a sense of love for lost souls, not duty. They are passionately convicted that they must seek the lost and minister to the existing flock. Of course you have your views on the practicalities of how they address their convictions, but it is wrong to say it is a sense of duty that persuades them to give up all a Catholic nun/priest does.
I can't see why there is such a to-do about women's clothes and hair in the meetings anyway. Like I said before, those that have an issue generally have issues with more than the bun and skirt and in time leave the meetings altogether. Those that I am friendly with are agreed that we are quite happy with looking modest (although most shun the frightfully dowdy denim skirt) in skirts and our hair pinned up in french rolls or a variation (we don't do the doughnut bun - too dreary) so while we may follow the rules, we are not like someone stuck in a timewarp from the Victorian era.
Some of us wear a little make-up. Very discreet and generally for evening out skin tones and enhancing eyelashes. We are agreed that we dislike the heavy-handed approach to trowelling on make-up but we accept a discreet application.
We don't wear jewellery save for wedding rings and most are agreed that we don't really want anything else. Some would have liked an engagement ring but agree that it's an area where it's too easy to slip into competition with others, perhaps to the extent of foolishness. For some reason, the substitute watch has not entered the competitive field - perhaps a little more difficult to estimate cost compared to a stonking great rock.
|
|
|
Post by fred on May 24, 2011 19:40:00 GMT -5
I'm not sure where you get your information from but things they are 'a changin'. A small number of professing girls now wear engagement rings (say 5% ?), but other forms of jewellery are commonplace. Fancy hairclips (often bejewelled) are accepted as are brooches - sometimes worn on dresses or as fasteners for adornment scarves ( sometimes referred as vegetarian necklaces ;D). On the banned list you find earings and necklaces. As yet I haven't been able to determine the status of nipple rings, but I'm working on it.
|
|
|
Post by pinky on May 24, 2011 20:07:18 GMT -5
Someone mistook me for a nun and asked for prayers in a city centre.It was a very humbling experience and afterwards I realised that I never had that in the meetings attire- because by looks alone no passerby could recognise my faith. Apple, so you were mistaken for a nun, are you saying your external appearance now demonstrates your faith? ************* Fred: So kind of you to volunteer your investigatory services! ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by emerald on May 25, 2011 0:58:40 GMT -5
I don't believe engagement rings have made an appearance in Ireland.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2011 4:33:40 GMT -5
I don't believe engagement rings have made an appearance in Ireland. I'm not so sure about that emerald. The last time I tried to ring someone in Ireland the line was engaged.
|
|
|
Post by emerald on May 25, 2011 6:54:15 GMT -5
Haha! Why didn't they have voice mail activated? I heard 2nd Gartocharn was cancelled after 4 meetings as the dining tent blew done in the storm. A case for permanent fixtures, do you think?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2011 9:12:27 GMT -5
Haha! Why didn't they have voice mail activated? I heard 2nd Gartocharn was cancelled after 4 meetings as the dining tent blew done in the storm. A case for permanent fixtures, do you think? Haven't heard about that yet. Certainly there have been some very strong winds here. Maybe there's now a case for a MacDonald's drive thru or that could be the end of conventions in Scotland ? Where's Paul when you need him ? There's no record in the NT of his tents blowing down!
|
|