Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2016 19:08:26 GMT -5
I don't think the original poster was thinking of flip flops ? True not every male is going to lust after a women that is dressed that way but we don't know who it might be a stumbling block to.It would be interesting to do a study and find out what % of men would not have any lusting thoughts and what % would. If we are guided by the Holy Spirit our way of dressing will reflect it. No I don't think the original poster was referring to flip flops Boksburg. I was just allowing myself a moment of humour. And going by your covering up theory it should mean that no Muslim woman dressed in a burka would've ever suffered any kind of sexual assault. Are you one of those people who blames the victim if there's a sexual assault? Adult or child? I mean, a little girl could wear a pretty dress with frilly socks and that could be a 'stumbling block' to a pedophile couldn't it? Bottom line is that as a Christian women we should dress modestly.Obviously a women is not to be blamed for a sexual assault even if she goes in the nude,not all women are Christians and therefore don't feel that the way they dress is a problem. |
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on May 4, 2016 19:10:34 GMT -5
Nathan, your use of the term "outdated" implies a desire to keep up with the world's standards of fashion. Why would those matter to a Christian? Are we concerned that the world might not accept us if we reveal too little of our bodies? I'm afraid Christians who seek to appease their consciences with "modest" swimsuits are starting from the world's standards and then "improving" on them just enough that, they hope, the world will not see them as different. God is the same yesterday, today, forever. Godly standards are never "outdated". Faithful Christians are different. If God's standards are never outdated, why has the way the F&W dressed changed so much over the years calleduntoliberty ? If God's standard was right in the 1900's why aren't people still dressing like they did then ? |
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 4, 2016 19:13:29 GMT -5
If a major % of men was not attracted to skimpy glad women or not glad at all the pornography industry would be out of business. Maybe the women were glad to be skimpily clad! Or unclad! Is it wrong for a person to dress to be sexually attractive? If people are attracted to pornography what is the downside? A lower sex crime rate? |
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 4, 2016 19:21:36 GMT -5
Don't put words in my mouth I don't take kindly to that.Bottom line is that as a Christian women we should dress modestly. Still, no definition of what is modest. What would you suggest wearing that would be sexually attractive to everyone?Yet you blame how a person dresses to be the cause of sin in observers. In either case the you are saying that the actor, the person wearing the clothes, is at fault. It is just a matter of degree. Sometime it is the implication that is being addressed. |
|
|
|
Post by whyisitso on May 4, 2016 19:31:51 GMT -5
No I don't think the original poster was referring to flip flops Boksburg. I was just allowing myself a moment of humour. And going by your covering up theory it should mean that no Muslim woman dressed in a burka would've ever suffered any kind of sexual assault. Are you one of those people who blames the victim if there's a sexual assault? Adult or child? I mean, a little girl could wear a pretty dress with frilly socks and that could be a 'stumbling block' to a pedophile couldn't it? Bottom line is that as a Christian women we should dress modestly.Obviously a women is not to be blamed for a sexual assault even if she goes in the nude,not all women are Christians and therefore don't feel that the way they dress is a problem. Thanks for clearing that up |
|
|
|
Post by whyisitso on May 4, 2016 19:33:40 GMT -5
Don't put words in my mouth I don't take kindly to that.Bottom line is that as a Christian women we should dress modestly. Still, no definition of what is modest. What would you suggest wearing that would be sexually attractive to everyone?Yet you blame how a person dresses to be the cause of sin in observers. In either case the you are saying that the actor, the person wearing the clothes, is at fault. It is just a matter of degree. Sometime it is the implication that is being addressed. I should use my filter more! Thanks for saying clearer what I was thinking rational. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2016 19:36:40 GMT -5
Don't put words in my mouth I don't take kindly to that.Bottom line is that as a Christian women we should dress modestly. The key to understanding what constitutes modesty in dress is to examine the attitudes and intents of the heart. Those whose hearts are inclined toward God will make every effort to dress modestly, decently, and appropriately. Those whose hearts are inclined toward self will dress in a manner designed to draw attention to themselves.Still, no definition of what is modest. What would you suggest wearing that would be sexually attractive to everyone? Yet you blame how a person dresses to be the cause of sin in observers. In either case the you are saying that the actor, the person wearing the clothes, is at fault. It is just a matter of degree. Sometime it is the implication that is being addressed. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2016 19:39:21 GMT -5
Bottom line is that as a Christian women we should dress modestly.Obviously a women is not to be blamed for a sexual assault even if she goes in the nude,not all women are Christians and therefore don't feel that the way they dress is a problem. Thanks for clearing that up No problem! |
|
|
|
Post by fred on May 4, 2016 19:48:29 GMT -5
The question of lust is an interesting one - what is lust and where is the line drawn between normal biological drives and lust? I believe that there are times when a failure to make a distinction leads to serious mental problems.
Usually when a man sees an alluring (to him) female certain biological changes happen in his body. He really has no control over that, but what happens when he continues to dwell on this event and perhaps fantasise about I believe moves into the realm of lust.
However, is it lust if a man fantasises about his wife?
|
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 4, 2016 20:03:40 GMT -5
Nathan, your use of the term "outdated" implies a desire to keep up with the world's standards of fashion. Why would those matter to a Christian? Are we concerned that the world might not accept us if we reveal too little of our bodies? I'm afraid Christians who seek to appease their consciences with "modest" swimsuits are starting from the world's standards and then "improving" on them just enough that, they hope, the world will not see them as different. God is the same yesterday, today, forever. Godly standards are never "outdated". Faithful Christians are different. If God's standards are never outdated, why has the way the F&W dressed changed so much over the years calleduntoliberty ? If God's standard was right in the 1900's why aren't people still dressing like they did then ? Are you implying something by your "If ... why" conjunction? It could be interpreted as though you are tying God's standards to the standards or conventions of a particular group. Nothing that we humans do can change God. |
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 4, 2016 20:44:34 GMT -5
Nathan, what the world considers "modest" is not modest by God's standards. We should not dress by the world's standards immodesty, nor by the world's standards of "modesty", but true modesty as becomes a child of God. We should not be on the beach at all if we cannot maintain a consistent testimony of godliness there. , who do you see as "the world" ? I confess to an inability to articulate a definition comprehensive enough that it can't have holes poked in it. So feel free to poke holes or to help me craft a better definition. The world consists of those who do not belong to the kingdom of God. I can do no better than to point to the words of my Lord and Saviour, who said the following: and of his apostle, who wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit: |
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on May 4, 2016 23:59:07 GMT -5
I confess to an inability to articulate a definition comprehensive enough that it can't have holes poked in it. So feel free to poke holes or to help me craft a better definition. The world consists of those who do not belong to the kingdom of God. I can do no better than to point to the words of my Lord and Saviour, who said the following: and of his apostle, who wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit: Ok maybe a more direct question, do you feel that the F&W are the only "right way" or the only group of people that are right ?  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2016 4:29:37 GMT -5
I think that some of the issue here is that people are reacting to unfounded fears. For example, it is a fear among many that making pornography easily available to adults will result in an increase in sex crimes. The reality of the situation is that as pornography has increased in availability, sex crimes have either decreased or not increased. If exposure of skin and the wearing of what is considered sexually provocative really increases lust one would expect the beach or public swimming pools to show a huge increase in sexual crimes. This is not the case. So if there is no connection between what people wear and the reaction of the observers what is the point of worrying about it? What is the value of making believers fret and worry about trying to figure out what the HS considers to be modest? Shouldn't the purpose of religion be to allow people enjoy their life and be happy? If a major % of men was not attracted to skimpy glad women or not glad at all the pornography industry would be out of business. Do you really mean "skimpy glad women" or "skimpy clad women" there is a difference, I suppose. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 5, 2016 8:50:23 GMT -5
The key to understanding what constitutes modesty in dress is to examine the attitudes and intents of the heart. What you seem to be saying is that modesty in dress is an individual thing. You might feel that the only appropriate clothing to wear in public is sackcloth and another might believe that a form fitting black dress is an example of modest dress. They would both be considered to be, as you explained, dressed modestly. Unless you know the attitudes and intent of another's heart. Those whose hearts are inclined toward God will make every effort to dress modestly, decently, and appropriately. Those whose hearts are inclined toward self will dress in a manner designed to draw attention to themselves. Can you explain what type of dress you consider decent and appropriate? Those whose hearts are inclined toward self will dress in a manner designed to draw attention to themselves. Isn't there a high probability that dressing in any manner that is not in step with the society that you are moving in will cause you to stand out and draw attention to yourself? If you are employed in an office where the dress is business formal and you are wearing a sleeved shirt and a long pinafore you may indeed be considered dressed modestly but it will draw attention. Obviously a women is not to be blamed for a sexual assault even if she goes in the nude,not all women are Christians and therefore don't feel that the way they dress is a problem. And the problem is that by wearing certain clothes someone looking at you might be offended, lust after you, approach you for a date, or potentially assault you? And you feel that it would be your fault because of the clothes you were wearing so you should avoid wearing any type of clothing that might cause another to have any of these feelings or act in any of these ways. I am still wondering what you might imagine you could wear that would prevent these things from happening. Everyone is accountable for their own sin.If the person is a Christian yes then she is at fault for wearing immodest clothing,not for the sin or possible crime of the onlooker,that would be absurd! What is this fault the christian person has committed? You claim that the person wearing the clothes is not at fault if the observer looks on and lusts in his/her heart and is not at fault if the observer commits a crime. What is the fault? There is way's of nicely asking if that is what the person meant instead of jumping to conclusions. And there is probably a nice way to tell people that what they inferred from your implication was incorrect. |
|
|
|
Post by breakfree on May 5, 2016 9:11:02 GMT -5
Naked we came into the world and naked we will return....
maybe a walk on a nude beach will clear our minds,and give us a new perspective on clothes....
Godliness has nothing to do with what we wear....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2016 9:37:33 GMT -5
If a major % of men was not attracted to skimpy glad women or not glad at all the pornography industry would be out of business. Do you really mean "skimpy glad women" or "skimpy clad women" there is a difference, I suppose. Oops yes I guess they would be glad also,thanks for pointing it out! |
|
|
|
Post by Brick on May 5, 2016 9:49:01 GMT -5
You should see the facebook photos of professing ladies in my area! Thongs on a beach! That is certainly cheeky of them! |
|
|
|
Post by Brick on May 5, 2016 10:25:29 GMT -5
Christians are 'different' to non-believers...[/quote]Actually, this idea is the expression of the ego. It is the same expression that Jesus told about in his illustration of the prayers of the Pharisee and the publican. The reality is that Christians are the same as everyone else. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 5, 2016 10:53:01 GMT -5
Hmmm....the available research indicates many negative trends.
- distorted perceptions and beliefs about relationships and sexuality - devaluation of marriage and child-rearing - increased aggression and trivialisation of criminal behaviour (eg rape) - Increased risk for sexual deviancy, experiencing negative intimate relationships and accepting rape myths
Stating all of the fears people have regarding pornography is one thing but looking at the research will give better results. Do you have any research that support these claims? For example, most research shows an increase in the availability of pornography is reflected in a decrease of sexual assault crimes. www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/28803/title/Porn--Good-for-us-/Example of a broader bit of research: The Clinic of Sexology, Copenhagen University Hospital Archives of Sexual BehaviorSelf-Perceived Effects of Pornography Consumption
Gert Martin Hald Æ Neil M. Malamuth
ABSTRACT
The self-perceived effects of "hardcore" pornography consumption were studied in a large representative sample of young adult Danish men and women aged 18-30. Using a survey that included the newly developed Pornography Consumption Effect Scale, we assessed participants' reports of how pornography has affected them personally in various areas, including their sexual knowledge, attitudes toward sex, attitudes toward and perception of the opposite sex, sex life, and general quality of life. Across all areas investigated, participants reported only small, if any, negative effects with men reporting slightly more negative effects than women. In contrast, moderate positive effects were generally reported by both men and women, with men reporting significantly more positive effects than women. For both sexes, sexual background factors were found to significantly predict both positive and negative effects of pornography consumption. Although the proportion of variance in positive effects accounted for by sexual background factors was substantial, it was small for negative effects. We discuss how the findings may be interpreted differently by supporters and opponents of pornography due to the reliance in this study on reported self-perceptions of effects. Nonetheless, we conclude that the overall findings suggest that many young Danish adults believe that pornography has had primarily a positive effect on various aspects of their lives. Full text of article, including the questionnaire used, is available here. I do not think an account is required. Do you have a reference for this research? I see your point. Regarding pornography and young children - that is what parenting is all about. Can all instances of young children being exposed to pornography be prevented? No.. On the other hand those that show pornography to minors are classified as child sexual abusers and there are laws in place to deal with that aspect. They just need to be enforced and parents need to know what their children are accessing on line. Define massive. This is looking more and more like an internet case of Reefer Madness. Unsupported fears used to make claims that are so false that they become a joke.
One does not become addicted to viewing pornography any more than one becomes addicted to biting their nails. It may well become a compulsion but not an addiction.
This is not an attempt to support pornography. It is, however, an attempt to look at the facts and see if they support the hysteria surrounding the topic, When cheaper publishing methods became available everyone was certain that the 'Pulp Fiction' flooding the shelves would be the downfall of society. When home movie projectors and 'blue' movies were available it was the end of society. XXX-Rated movies playing down town would turn everyone into a sex maniac. VHS tapes and pornography on the privacy of your home would ruin marriage. Digital cameras and porn on the internet signals the end of civilization as we know it. Some people will always see or create a bogeyman. Along the same lines, in the US there was widespread fear that the legalization of marijuana would lead to the widespread use of the drug and increased use among adolescents. As many expected this was not the case. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 5, 2016 11:12:16 GMT -5
Naked we came into the world and naked we will return.... maybe a walk on a nude beach will clear our minds,and give us a new perspective on clothes.... Maybe walking nude on a nude beach! Personally, the idea of changing into a 'bathing costume' to go swimming seems absurd. We are all naked under out clothes! Really - is a thin layer of gabardine really going to make a difference? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2016 12:15:29 GMT -5
You should see the facebook photos of professing ladies in my area! Thongs on a beach! That is certainly cheeky of them! Hi Brick, long time no see, no hear. Solid as ever! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2016 12:39:28 GMT -5
The key to understanding what constitutes modesty in dress is to examine the attitudes and intents of the heart. What you seem to be saying is that modesty in dress is an individual thing. You might feel that the only appropriate clothing to wear in public is sackcloth and another might believe that a form fitting black dress is an example of modest dress. They would both be considered to be, as you explained, dressed modestly. Unless you know the attitudes and intent of another's heart. Those whose hearts are inclined toward God will make every effort to dress modestly, decently, and appropriately. Those whose hearts are inclined toward self will dress in a manner designed to draw attention to themselves. Can you explain what type of dress you consider decent and appropriate? Those whose hearts are inclined toward self will dress in a manner designed to draw attention to themselves. Isn't there a high probability that dressing in any manner that is not in step with the society that you are moving in will cause you to stand out and draw attention to yourself? If you are employed in an office where the dress is business formal and you are wearing a sleeved shirt and a long pinafore you may indeed be considered dressed modestly but it will draw attention. Obviously a women is not to be blamed for a sexual assault even if she goes in the nude,not all women are Christians and therefore don't feel that the way they dress is a problem. And the problem is that by wearing certain clothes someone looking at you might be offended, lust after you, approach you for a date, or potentially assault you? And you feel that it would be your fault because of the clothes you were wearing so you should avoid wearing any type of clothing that might cause another to have any of these feelings or act in any of these ways. I am still wondering what you might imagine you could wear that would prevent these things from happening. Everyone is accountable for their own sin.If the person is a Christian yes then she is at fault for wearing immodest clothing,not for the sin or possible crime of the onlooker,that would be absurd! What is this fault the christian person has committed? You claim that the person wearing the clothes is not at fault if the observer looks on and lusts in his/her heart and is not at fault if the observer commits a crime. What is the fault? There is way's of nicely asking if that is what the person meant instead of jumping to conclusions. And there is probably a nice way to tell people that what they inferred from your implication was incorrect. The bottom line is that we have to do what we are convicted of in our hearts to doing.We are not here to judge others that don't have the same conviction and they are as I have said before not to be blamed for others sins or crimes by the way they dress.Romans 14:2,3,4,13,22. For myself that is not wearing bikini's or tight clothes that show of every curve. I would not want people to judge my shoulder length hair since I am not convicted in my heart that it should be longer. Hey rational you would make out a good lawyer,analyzing every word,phew! |
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 5, 2016 12:40:01 GMT -5
I know this thread is largely focussed on dress but Jesus didn't focus on that at all. He was far more focussed on issues like loving money etc and where that would lead. I think the Bible teaches clearly about the challenges that we will face with world, flesh and devil. We see that in the three types of unproductive soil in the Sower and seed parable and in what Paul had to say in Ephesians 2: As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath. As Christians we definitely need to stand out from the crowd but not by wearing black stockings To say that Jesus did not focus on dress is a diversion. The stark public immorality of our modern world was not known in the times and places where Jesus walked the earth. Something close may or may not have been common in certain Roman cities, but certainly not in Judea and the surrounding areas. Jesus taught very strongly and severely against sin in the sermon on the mount and elsewhere. He told sinners to repent, to "go, and sin no more". If Jesus is not recorded as mentioning a specific sin, that does not mean he does not care about that sin and we are free to do it while claiming to love him. Further, Jesus did teach clearly against sins that are closely related to the way people dress. Is the way you dress an area of your life about which you believe your Lord does not care? If he knows the number of the hairs of our head, I believe he does care how his people dress. A man or woman who dresses in a worldly way is to that extent not letting the light of Christ shine in the world. Parents who dress their children inappropriately are teaching their children to conform themselves to the world and encouraging immorality. The verse you quote from Ephesians is very good for this thread and shows clearly that believers were formerly dead in sin while they walked in the ways of the world and now we are called to a new life in Christ, not to continue walking in the ways of the world and following the standards of the world, but seeking to dedicate all things to Christ and serve him with every thought and word and deed. |
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 5, 2016 12:52:22 GMT -5
Actually, this idea is the expression of the ego. It is the same expression that Jesus told about in his illustration of the prayers of the Pharisee and the publican. The reality is that Christians are the same as everyone else. Is salt the same as that which it flavors? Is light the same as the darkness which it enlightens? When Jesus spoke of the "publicans and harlots" coming into the kingdom of God (see Matthew 21), he did not mean that they would continue as publicans and harlots. The Pharisees (though not all of them) had convinced themselves that they were right, and were not willing for repentance. The "publicans and harlots" that came into the kingdom of God repented of their sins and began bearing fruits in accordance with repentance and a new life in Christ. Jesus taught consistently and repeatedly that disciple of his must keep his commandments and bear fruit. You can read for yourself of the tree or the fruit that does not bear fruit and what the Lord will do with it. Or of those to whom the Lord will say "I never knew you" because they never committed themselves to him, to reject their former ways of the flesh and instead serve him and walk in his ways. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 5, 2016 13:23:33 GMT -5
Hey rational you would make out a good lawyer,analyzing every word,phew! :) On a discussion board words are all we have to go on. You use what you have. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2016 16:21:41 GMT -5
As far as the way our fellowship mimics each other in dress and hairstyle, I think that cames from the way the "faith mission" people dressed who William Irvine belonged to before.
|
|
|
|
Post by ellie on May 5, 2016 17:52:26 GMT -5
I know this thread is largely focussed on dress but Jesus didn't focus on that at all. He was far more focussed on issues like loving money etc and where that would lead. I think the Bible teaches clearly about the challenges that we will face with world, flesh and devil. We see that in the three types of unproductive soil in the Sower and seed parable and in what Paul had to say in Ephesians 2: As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath. As Christians we definitely need to stand out from the crowd but not by wearing black stockings To say that Jesus did not focus on dress is a diversion. The stark public immorality of our modern world was not known in the times and places where Jesus walked the earth. Something close may or may not have been common in certain Roman cities, but certainly not in Judea and the surrounding areas. Sepphoris is 6km from Nazareth. That's a pretty close and cosmopolitan city. |
|
|
|
Post by breakfree on May 5, 2016 18:25:18 GMT -5
If godliness means being like God (or trying to be)...what clothes does God wear and who makes them ?......just thinking out loud...
|
|
