|
Post by ts on Mar 11, 2013 18:45:18 GMT -5
Given the dress of my professing FACEBOOK friends, I haven't created a thread about dress/clothing for awhile. I think it is less and less of an issue apart from the older women in the Kingdom. There has always been a push among the friends to look more normal. The victories among the friends have to be quiet, persistent victories. They have to somehow slip the new dress codes in subtly and the workers have to figure out some way of allowing previously unrighteous attire without losing face. Normally how it happens is that people just start doing it, the workers let time pass and when someone brings up how detrimental the enforcement of ridiculous attire was, they say, "Hey, that was in the past. You are bitter." The workers are still the standard bearers. They STILL say that the sister workers are the examples for women regardless of how the professing women chose to dress. And the brother workers really are over the sister workers and will definitely kick them out of the work if they don't stay within a certain standard. I know that the brother workers will appear to defer to the sister workers when women ask for guidance on dress code, but the brother workers are very confident that the sister workers will keep the standard dictated by the male leadership. The dress code appears to be less of an issue, but it isn't. You will see it less of an issue when you start seeing brother workers and sister workers looking like the friends who look like the rest of the world. That would include sister workers wearing pants in many more situations than the limited times they do presently.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 11, 2013 20:15:21 GMT -5
So you judged them based on the outward appearance- and your judgmental conclusion is that the bank staff were "appearing to be professing" but not actually. Based on their manner of dress, you have no idea of whether or not they are saved, Godly, or even serial killers, do you? And so it goes with the friends and workers- or even our neighbor- the outward dress does not indicate the inward spirit. Exactly, Ted Bundy looked quite acceptable. No one can tell the heart of anyone based on their clothes. It's amazing that people would even think this is a way to know what people are like. I have worked with street people and ex cons and know full well there is no way to tell by someones looks what their hearts are like. When I first started working in Corrections Canada, I had a whole different view then when I had been there for 10 years. I can tell you there are very few really 'bad' people out there. There are a lot of scarred and wounded and really messed up people, but truly bad, not many. Some yes, but the percentage is very low. And, those who are really truly sociopaths have been from a very young age which makes it possible they are born that way. [/color][/quote] That is an interesting observation about sociopaths.
It is such a hard condition to understand!
I know the last I read about it, it suddenly hit me that it may be that they were actually born that way with a Deficiency in a certain ability, an ability to emphasize with other people, just as others are born with a particular deficiency in something else!
|
|
|
Post by snow on Mar 11, 2013 20:49:32 GMT -5
Exactly, Ted Bundy looked quite acceptable. No one can tell the heart of anyone based on their clothes. It's amazing that people would even think this is a way to know what people are like. I have worked with street people and ex cons and know full well there is no way to tell by someones looks what their hearts are like. When I first started working in Corrections Canada, I had a whole different view then when I had been there for 10 years. I can tell you there are very few really 'bad' people out there. There are a lot of scarred and wounded and really messed up people, but truly bad, not many. Some yes, but the percentage is very low. And, those who are really truly sociopaths have been from a very young age which makes it possible they are born that way. [/color][/quote] That is an interesting observation about sociopaths.
It is such a hard condition to understand!
I know the last I read about it, it suddenly hit me that it may be that they were actually born that way with a Deficiency in a certain ability, an ability to emphasize with other people, just as others are born with a particular deficiency in something else![/quote] Yes, exactly. That is what I have read also. They truly do not seem to be able to empathize and that is a real problem. It is what gives us an understanding of what our actions do to others. I have seen people within the system that understand on a 'logical' level that what they do to others is wrong, just not able to 'feel' it like others do. They only regret or remorse in most cases is that they got caught and are now going through this. No empathy for the victim. And, from doing their psych histories this behavior was noticed quite young when parents were interviewed. It is thought to be another deficiency that they were born with. I have met a few over the years in my work and they are usually quite pleasant and quite aware of what society 'expects' of them, and perform it quite well. It's when they do decide to do something that they cannot 'feel' any remorse. It's like they only are restrained from doing things because of the consequences not because of what it would do to another human being.
|
|
|
Post by ts on Mar 11, 2013 21:28:43 GMT -5
That is an interesting observation about sociopaths.
It is such a hard condition to understand!
I know the last I read about it, it suddenly hit me that it may be that they were actually born that way with a Deficiency in a certain ability, an ability to emphasize with other people, just as others are born with a particular deficiency in something else! Yes, exactly. That is what I have read also. They truly do not seem to be able to empathize and that is a real problem. It is what gives us an understanding of what our actions do to others. I have seen people within the system that understand on a 'logical' level that what they do to others is wrong, just not able to 'feel' it like others do. They only regret or remorse in most cases is that they got caught and are now going through this. No empathy for the victim. And, from doing their psych histories this behavior was noticed quite young when parents were interviewed. It is thought to be another deficiency that they were born with. I have met a few over the years in my work and they are usually quite pleasant and quite aware of what society 'expects' of them, and perform it quite well. It's when they do decide to do something that they cannot 'feel' any remorse. It's like they only are restrained from doing things because of the consequences not because of what it would do to another human being. A sociopath can operate easily (more easily???) in a system like the 2x2s because it is easy to put up a facade with behaviour modification(in place of care and empathy). Do all the socially acceptable things within the group and it is easy to get in control. Control is a hallmark of a sociopath.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2013 6:39:43 GMT -5
Sister workers have a dress code also. Less strict than say the 1970s and 1980s, I am sure of that.
|
|
|
Post by findingtruth on Mar 12, 2013 8:29:43 GMT -5
JESUS never taught HIS people to be concerned about outward dress. His focus was on spiritual transformation!! How to dress in order to please man distracts us from focusing on the values that Jesus taught.
I fully believe that many of the apostles (including Paul) were somewhat distracted by outward appearance and taught things outside of the gospel message. In my opinion, the only way we can sift through these "extras" is to compare what the writers of the New Testament stated with what Jesus said. Remember what Jesus said...."You have heard it said.....but I say...."? This clearly shows Jesus contradicting the teaching of those who felt they were in line with God's word.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Mar 12, 2013 13:13:17 GMT -5
JESUS never taught HIS people to be concerned about outward dress. His focus was on spiritual transformation!! How to dress in order to please man distracts us from focusing on the values that Jesus taught. I fully believe that many of the apostles (including Paul) were somewhat distracted by outward appearance and taught things outside of the gospel message. In my opinion, the only way we can sift through these "extras" is to compare what the writers of the New Testament stated with what Jesus said. Remember what Jesus said...."You have heard it said.....but I say...."? This clearly shows Jesus contradicting the teaching of those who felt they were in line with God's word. Well Paul was a Jew and Jewish women that are Orthodox still need to wear something on their heads when out in public. That can be anything from a scarf or even a wig. But the head needs covering when in the presence of another male that is not family.
|
|
|
Post by swarupa on Mar 12, 2013 16:37:29 GMT -5
the dress code of the sister workers really set them as old maids which they are really are.
|
|
|
Post by ts on Mar 12, 2013 17:47:10 GMT -5
Sister workers have a dress code also. Less strict than say the 1970s and 1980s, I am sure of that. Well, yes. And the 70s and 80s was probably less strict than the 40s and 50s without the black stockings. But they still do not fit in to the rest of the modest world that sometimes wears skirts and sometimes wears pants and wear their hair in a moderate, fashionable way. They still look like religious people in just about any setting they go in.
|
|
|
Post by findingtruth on Mar 13, 2013 22:04:45 GMT -5
JESUS never taught HIS people to be concerned about outward dress. His focus was on spiritual transformation!! How to dress in order to please man distracts us from focusing on the values that Jesus taught. I fully believe that many of the apostles (including Paul) were somewhat distracted by outward appearance and taught things outside of the gospel message. In my opinion, the only way we can sift through these "extras" is to compare what the writers of the New Testament stated with what Jesus said. Remember what Jesus said...."You have heard it said.....but I say...."? This clearly shows Jesus contradicting the teaching of those who felt they were in line with God's word. Well Paul was a Jew and Jewish women that are Orthodox still need to wear something on their heads when out in public. That can be anything from a scarf or even a wig. But the head needs covering when in the presence of another male that is not family. My point exactly. Paul entangled custom and tradition with the message of Jesus. Jesus taught ONLY spiritual matters where Paul was still somewhat entrapped with the laws of man. Because of this it's easy to confuse the laws of man with the gospel of Christ. And a good number of people are good at presenting man's laws as God's laws.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Mar 14, 2013 10:44:56 GMT -5
Well Paul was a Jew and Jewish women that are Orthodox still need to wear something on their heads when out in public. That can be anything from a scarf or even a wig. But the head needs covering when in the presence of another male that is not family. My point exactly. Paul entangled custom and tradition with the message of Jesus. Jesus taught ONLY spiritual matters where Paul was still somewhat entrapped with the laws of man. Because of this it's easy to confuse the laws of man with the gospel of Christ. And a good number of people are good at presenting man's laws as God's laws. I agree with that, they do that very well! I'm not sure there is anything 'but' man's laws and they're just trying to present them as God's laws. Other than the physical laws of nature I don't think there are any other 'laws' that aren't man made.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2013 4:57:10 GMT -5
Well, Bert, you are wrong there. The general view of psychologists is that if a man expects a women to change the way she dresses because he finds it tempting then he has a problem. I also believe Jesus words when he condemned the Pharisees for dressing religious but saying their hearts were far from him. Got nothing to do with "temping" men. Dressing moderate also applies to men. We don't go in for "dressing religious" - that's for religious functionaries. I looked some up: alb - a long white gown chasuble - garment which hangs over the shoulders stole - another shoulder thingo... dalmatic - a sort of tunic cope - for when even religious dignities might be wet skull cap - like what some Jews wear on their head etc etc etc from www.awakentoprayer.org/vestments.htmThis is a good website. Quote from the site, "In every religion since the world began, the practice has been in vogue of wearing some form of vestment." It is interesting to ask what Jesus wore, and where in the NT it gives instructions for all the garments found on this site.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2013 6:00:17 GMT -5
I think a person has to go all the way back to the Pharisees in Jesus day to find a comparable fixation with dress code to 2x2ism -- and Jesus clearly condemned them for it.
And I also agree that if a man has a temptation problem with the way women dress then it is the mans inability to deal with temptation that is the problem. Deal with it - instead of placing responsibility away from yourself.
Jesus apparel made it possible for him to melt in with the crowd -- The beauty of his life and spirit did NOT lie in his outward appearance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2013 6:09:53 GMT -5
Melt into what particular crowd? Certainly didn't melt into the ornate religious gowned crowd. Wouldn't have melted into the pagan crowd. Wouldn't have melted into the aristocratic crowd. Wouldn't have melted into the fashion crowd. Wouldn't have melted into the avant gard crowd. Wouldn't have melted into the dissident crowd.
|
|
|
Post by emerald on Mar 20, 2013 6:22:26 GMT -5
Melt into what particular crowd? Certainly didn't melt into the ornate religious gowned crowd. Wouldn't have melted into the pagan crowd. Wouldn't have melted into the aristocratic crowd. Wouldn't have melted into the fashion crowd. Wouldn't have melted into the avant gard crowd. Wouldn't have melted into the dissident crowd. How do you know? Wasn't there a certain demand for His clothes at the foot of the cross? If His clothes had been shabby I can't see anyone being interested in them. And what's more, with the garb men tend to wear in the Middle East, there's not a lot of scope to express pagan beliefs, dissident beliefs etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2013 6:28:57 GMT -5
Even in the severity of the Islamic chador there is scope for expression - even rebellion * Jesus would have worn what was considered respectful for His age. He did not wear rags or seek to identify with the materially poor, anymore than he would have rubbed shoulders with the rich and important.
* With the cooling of revolutionary enthusiasm and increasing popular disenchantment with the new government, the rules of hijab have been largely eroded, in many ways only being a technicality among some women, who wear headscarves so far back on their heads it barely covers it, and often combined with a significant amount of makeup. Wikipedia.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Mar 20, 2013 7:07:00 GMT -5
Even in the severity of the Islamic chador there is scope for expression - even rebellion * Jesus would have worn what was considered respectful for His age. He did not wear rags or seek to identify with the materially poor, anymore than he would have rubbed shoulders with the rich and important. * With the cooling of revolutionary enthusiasm and increasing popular disenchantment with the new government, the rules of hijab have been largely eroded, in many ways only being a technicality among some women, who wear headscarves so far back on their heads it barely covers it, and often combined with a significant amount of makeup. Wikipedia.Bert, how does this relate to 2x2s?
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Mar 20, 2013 7:33:36 GMT -5
Jesus would have worn what was considered respectful for His age. He did not wear rags or seek to identify with the materially poor, anymore than he would have rubbed shoulders with the rich and important. I suppose that depends on what "rubbed shoulders with" means.
|
|
|
Post by emerald on Mar 20, 2013 7:57:48 GMT -5
Even in the severity of the Islamic chador there is scope for expression - even rebellion * Jesus would have worn what was considered respectful for His age. He did not wear rags or seek to identify with the materially poor, anymore than he would have rubbed shoulders with the rich and important. * With the cooling of revolutionary enthusiasm and increasing popular disenchantment with the new government, the rules of hijab have been largely eroded, in many ways only being a technicality among some women, who wear headscarves so far back on their heads it barely covers it, and often combined with a significant amount of makeup. Wikipedia.Lol! I can't imagine Jesus wore a hijab. ;D I said there wasn't much room for men to express themselves with long dress-type garments and head cloths. Different colours maybe, but the general effect is the same. And there I thought Jesus rubbed shoulders with everyone - He was at a wedding, He was in the synagogue, He was at the beach, He even spoke to the woman at the well. Guess He got all that wrong, eh? Better to sit at reserved tables at convention eating special food, sitting on comfortable seats, waited on by several women and far apart from the people that fund the whole operation, who are also far apart from the wicked, evil world?
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Mar 20, 2013 8:21:17 GMT -5
Melt into what particular crowd? Certainly didn't melt into the ornate religious gowned crowd. Wouldn't have melted into the pagan crowd. Wouldn't have melted into the aristocratic crowd. Wouldn't have melted into the fashion crowd. Wouldn't have melted into the avant gard crowd. Wouldn't have melted into the dissident crowd. Depends on what you mean by 'melt' into those crowds. Their are accounts in the bible of him being in all the different groups of his time. He was with the tax collectors, the hookers, the aristocrats, the military, the leaders of religious groups, taught in the synagogues, on mountains, in boats, in villages..... pretty much blended in with every crowd he hung out with. Paul as well mentioned how he would become like those he wished to share the message with, which indicated he would be willing to meet them on their terms. I have never thought that Jesus cared about how a person appeared on the outside. He always seemed to be concerned with what was on the inside. The times he spoke about outward appearance was to point out the hypocrisy of it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2013 10:04:27 GMT -5
Before I professed, I looked more modest than a lot of professing women I know. I looked more modest in my pants than they do in their skirts. It's not about rules, but about what God has laid on your heart. What is modest does depend on culture and situation, but it also depends on the person. I may not feel modest in something that somebody else looks perfectly modest in. Like so many other things in life, it's not about rules but about spirit. If men have a problem with their eyes, then I don't want to be a stumbling block for them, whether they are professing or not. I am not absolving them of responsibility for their thoughts and actions. But I do have a desire that when somebody looks at me their thoughts would be directed toward God, not my flesh.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Mar 20, 2013 12:12:15 GMT -5
It's not about rules, but about what God has laid on your heart. Like so many other things in life, it's not about rules but about spirit. So, why do the workers not accept professing women as being "true in spirit" if the women are wearing makeup, jewelry, and or pants- especially if God laid it on the women's heart that it was OK? Peter could not have written it more clearly- IT IS NOT about the clothing, the hair, the adornment, etc- but about the meek and quiet Spirit, and the other fruit of the Spirit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2013 17:01:08 GMT -5
Jesus met all social groups in Israel, but He didn't share their apperance. And yes, appearances were very much on His mind. The appearance of the Pharisees and Saducees comes to mind, ie what they wore and how they prayed in public. And Paul warned about even the "appearance" of evil.
|
|
|
Post by findingtruth on Mar 20, 2013 17:12:54 GMT -5
Jesus met all social groups in Israel, but He didn't share their apperance. And yes, appearances were very much on His mind. The appearance of the Pharisees and Saducees comes to mind, ie what they wore and how they prayed in public. And Paul warned about even the "appearance" of evil. Bert, I cannot believe you're serious with this! Why don't you explain exactly what point Jesus was making about the clothing of the Pharisees and Saducees!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2013 17:22:52 GMT -5
Peter was saying that where your heart is, there too will be your appearance.
"Your beauty should NOT come from outward adornment, such as elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold jewelry or fine clothes." New International Bible.
|
|
|
Post by emerald on Mar 20, 2013 17:47:23 GMT -5
Peter was saying that where your heart is, there too will be your appearance. "Your beauty should NOT come from outward adornment, such as elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold jewelry or fine clothes." New International Bible.Woops! Then I think not just the friends but very many workers fail with the fine clothes here in Ireland. Elaborate hairstyles? Have you any idea how difficult it is to pin a bun to your head? Short hair therefore by this measure is more modest. As for the gold jewellery, wedding rings, engagement watches... where do they fit in? Not to mention some of the friends sporting gold teeth. ;D Somehow I think it doesn't really matter what people wear. I know a few women in the meetings that dress expensively, go to the beautician and hairdressers but have a much sweeter spirit than some of their bitter plainer sisters in Christ. Clothing and adornments will never outshine a beautiful spirit.
|
|
|
Post by emerald on Mar 20, 2013 17:49:08 GMT -5
Jesus met all social groups in Israel, but He didn't share their apperance. And yes, appearances were very much on His mind. The appearance of the Pharisees and Saducees comes to mind, ie what they wore and how they prayed in public. And Paul warned about even the "appearance" of evil. Well he must have shared the appearance with at least one social group or I'm sure his odd dress would have been commented on. Just as J the B's was commented on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2013 18:34:40 GMT -5
His "odd dress" was commented on - it was of a quality that to tear it apart would have devalued it. Snide remarks about the quality of our Worker's garments reminds me of that verse about Jesus' garment.
|
|