How Is A Christian Lady Supposed to Dress?

[missmuffet]

No popcorn for me.It has to be Kettle corn 

[enoob57]

no corn in this kettle no way no how...

[missmuffet]

no corn in this kettle no way no how...

You could not pay me enough to eat any of my kettle corn out of that mangy kettle that wears glasses and has horns  

[Openly Curious]

We guys can lust over an out of shape over weight moo moo wearing blow up doll. So, our varied opinions really do not matter as much as yours do.

darn shame as a Christian

I can give you lots and lots of scripture that would make any woman showing anything above the ankle or below the chin out to be a whore

But I have already made the point that this was the Law not Grace. The ideal and the minimum requirement for that portion of the Law if you were going to try to save yourself from God's wrath.

I too would like or rather love to see all of these numerous scriptures making every woman a "whore" wearing anything above the ankle or below the chin. Credibility is the word that is coming to my mind here.

The thread is not about Law verses Grace although some think it is, some think we are still under law, some don't know the difference between law and grace and some are just plain confused about law and grace, but the thread is about how a christian lady should dress with the emphasis being placed on a dress code for women. The scriptural text used in the OP I want to point out is a NT teaching under the New Covenant of grace and "not" a passed away OT teaching under the Law which is being taught in the 1 Timothy 2 passage.

[Openly Curious]

no corn in this kettle no way no how...

Buy yourself some goobers then unless you have a beef with goobers too. Have to agree disturbing looking kettle

[missmuffet]

 

no corn in this kettle no way no how...

Buy yourself some goobers then unless you have a beef with goobers too. Have to agree disturbing looking kettle

 

Excuse me    What are goobers?

[Openly Curious]

The OP was asking how Christian ladies are supposed to dress, and clearly, the "main purpose was not to prohibit women from wearing jewelry or plaiting the hair, but it was about putting the "greater emphasis" on the inner man,

which is why I brought up things like submitting to their husbands.  That was part of the way they dress the inner man according to the additional passage I brought into the discussion.  There is no question men should dress modest, as should women, but this thread wasn't about men.  I think it is common sense everyone should dress modest.

Then why is that all your emphasis is being placed on an outward dress code if the "Greater Emphasis" is being placed on the inner man. Are you choosing the "Lesser Emphasis" of the natural man an a dress code of sorts for how a christian woman should dress outwardly.

Do you not understand that putting on and having a "Spirit of Humility" and service to others is a willing submission that "cannot" be put on with a type of dress code of any kind. The Spirit of humility can be seen and manifested by the good works of righteousness of the christian woman in the new person of Christ in what she does in and during her life time in her service to the Lord and other around her. Yes the manner of clothing of choice can show forth and reveal the heart of christian woman and her sobriety but not always. But absoluterly there is no outward clothing that a christian woman or man can use to make them walk in the Spirit of humility willingly from their hearts before the Lord and in His sight. The dress for a christian woman is her inward man that comes from God and through the blood yielding themselves willingly following the Spirit. And last time I read Galatians 5 I did not find a dress code of sorts that reflected on the outward body of the christian woman in what her outward dress should be listed in the fruits of the Spirit. Which is what we are to bear as men and women following the Spirit, and I still read that if you walk in the Spirit there is NO LAW.

Women pretty much wear anything they want and fix their hair any way they want.  They wear make-up or are plain faced or they wear jewelry or choose not to.  To claim their is a double standard against women is silly.  You just see women mentioned more than men here "because" men notice what is taking place.

Please forgive me but you sound like a whinning child that is not getting there way on something.

Women are being mentioned more than men Because men notice what is taking place what kind of bull is this.

News flash women are not as ignorant about things as you may think they are. The topic of dress for women is a biblical topic and it is one of confusion and lack of understanding in most of the cases. Some are started by some only to stir strife among the brethren shame on them for doing that as scripture warns that if we bite and devour one another then take heed lest we be consumed of one another. The subject comes up for various reasons and "NOT" because men notice what is taking place and women don't. That's kind of an arrogant statement or at least it comes across that way to me when I read it.

Men are not absolete as you try to make them out to be they get up everyday and put on the clothes of their choice and dress the way they want too they fix and comb their hair and so on just like the women folk do they have that same freedom. Or are you personally dictated to how you should dress a certain way. Meekness {humility applies to both men and women in the Lord.

2. How would people react to a man who said he is personally a cocktail dress type of guy.

Well Butero I have seen far worse than that in real life. I'm sure you have too, just curious here but what has been your personal reaction towards the men of the type you described. Was it just a wag of the head as you walked away, was it you said a prayer for his soul, was it you made a point to witness to them, or was it you just murmured and complained and did nothing. just curious you don't have to answer. What about those men who want keep their pants pulled up and they could care less if you saw their butt cracks or not? What about a sloppy dressed man and a slob does that outward reflection of the men say anything of his inward spirit of meekness (humility) before God or NO? just curious you really don't have to answer.

We run into repetition at WB over the same topics because we don't universally agree on certain topics, so you have people bring them up.  One thing I have come to understand is that it really doesn't matter what scripture says on anything when push comes to shove.  "Everyone" is going to do what they want, and find some way to defend it.  It is just the reality of the situation.

Butero I can't help but to ask, "Are you including yourself in that "EVERYONE" you mentioned above? Or are you an ISOLATED case from that everyone?

There is never ever going to be such a thing as universal agreement. People are at different places and levels in their personal knowledge and as said before have not yet come to understanding on this biblical subject concerning dressing the inward man and putting off the old man we use to be. Sometimes repition can be good if people want to discuss something rather than looking at the others having different views from them as an enemy and then try to destroy and kill them in the process. A heart like that has murder of a different kind living inside of it void of love. People especially like me have to be thouroughly convinced of someone's doctrine and just because one is trying to shove something down my throat as an authority over me like a church leader or teacher so to speak doesn't mean I am going to accept then chew and swallow it hook like and sinker. People read the word and gain there own understanding or no understanding at all and that has to be respected whether I agree personally with the others or not. People have a right to believe their own interpretion of the bible and to live by it. It is only God that can show the seeking heart his truth on the matter and until that happens the topic will continue to be brought up. The least we could do is try to bring our opinions and beliefs to the conversation for the sake of edification.

You can come in here and prove something is true in scripture beyond any reasonable doubt, and it won't matter.  People will continue to do what they want even if it is wrong.  They will "claim personal revelation, not being convicted or some cultural argument, but they will find a way to "defend" whatever they are doing, so in that sense, this is an exercise in futility.

A person can come in here and prove something that they "think" is true within themselves and be totally wrong as the evidence isn't there to be without a doubt or what they claim is evidence is a bunch of made up stuff to win their case. I've seen all kinds of comers and goers.

What is it that you "claim" if not personal revelation on the subject? How do you "defend" the way you personally live or do you?

A bit of advice take it or leave it. "Stop being futile and you might have more energy for other things". Why do you continue doing an exercise that absolutely doesn't work for you. I have to admit sometimes it takes me a while to learn a lesson and to turn from what I was doing and go in a different direction.

[Openly Curious]

no corn in this kettle no way no how...

Buy yourself some goobers then unless you have a beef with goobers too. Have to agree disturbing looking kettle

Excuse me    What are goobers?

no corn in this kettle no way no how...

Buy yourself some goobers then, unless you have a beef with goobers too. Have to agree disturbing looking kettle

Excuse me    What are goobers?

They are single chocolate covered peanuts that come in a box like m&m's do. They are popular to eat when watching movies and I have no idea where they got the name for them???

[Estrella]

It looks like I have a lot to address this morning. I will try to do so as briefly as possible.

@ Enoob. Basically, I don't see you following scripture, period. I see you going by your own feelings, and you call that being led of God. You want to use scriptures that seem to indicate we aren't under law, while ignoring any scriptures that tell us how we should live. It goes far beyond beings saved by law. In your case, you just ignore scripture entirely.

@ MorningGlory. The only people that are applauding Bruce Jenner are the perverts in the world, and his case is a bit more extreme in that he had a sex change. Let Bruce Jenner go into your typical Christian Church and try to join and be accepted and see how he is treated.

@ Openly Curious. There is a lot to cover, but I will try to be brief. If what I said sounds like a whining child, I would have to refer you back to your first comment in this thread, and how it sounds like a whiny child complaining over how we have all these threads about women and leave out the men entirely. You did the exact same thing. You ask why I put the greater emphasis on clothing and outward appearance if it should be on the inner man? I could ask you the same thing. I tried to explain that this passage is more about the inner person, but you along with many others have put the emphasis on modesty, and in your case, for men and women. Again, you did the exact same thing you are saying something negative to me about. There is also the issue of more importance verses no importance. The inner man may be the most important issue, but that doesn't mean the outward doesn't matter.

I stand by everything I said about why issues of women's clothes and appearance come up so much. It happens because people can easily observe sin taking place in that area, or at least have questions over whether a sin is being committed, as was the case in the OP. I don't think women are necessarily ignorant over scriptures about clothing and outward appearance. I have come in contact with many that know exactly what scripture says. I would say it is more like they try to defend doing things that are sinful because they want to do it. I have already had one woman admit women wearing pants was dressing like a guy, another admit the double standard that exists, and one say that if she had to give up pants, she would have to throw up her hands. What happens is that people look for ways to claim what they are doing is ok, even when faced with scripture saying that it is not ok. Do men really have the freedom to get up and wear whatever they want? Not hardly. There is a battle going on in some fast food restaurants involving men who want to dress like women openly, and "News Flash," they can't do it. On the other hand, women can and do dress like men or women. They can wear the exact same clothing as their male counterparts, or a dress. Men are not free to go around with long hair in many work places. They can't where I work, but women can have very short hair or long hair. There is a clear double standard. If it sounds whiny to point that out, how did you sound complaining about the OP? I would say whiny.

Worse or lesser sins are not the issue to me. I can almost always find someone committing a worse sin than their fellow man, so sure, I can find a worse sin than a man wearing a dress or women wearing pants. That still doesn't change the fact they are in sin. They are committing what the Bible calls an abomination, which means something disgusting in the sight of God. Just because I can find someone else committing a greater transgression doesn't mean they aren't wrong. Sloppy dress, while certainly a reflection of the inner man, is not mentioned as a sin. That is why I don't put an emphasis on it. We definitely do live in a society of slobs, but it is not a sin issue. It makes for interesting discussion, when compared to times past, but that is pretty much it.

Do I include myself in the everyone comment about people doing what they want? Yes and no. I certainly include myself in saying that I do what I want, because I do make my own choices, but I try to be honest and admit when what I am doing is not right in the sight of God. What I am getting at is others spend their time justifying how their actions are really ok, in spite of the fact scripture says otherwise. Have I ever tried to justify sinful behavior? I am sure I have at different points in my life, but I try to be honest and admit that my behavior isn't really Christ like when I am doing something contrary to scripture. An example might be my temper. We are told to be angry and sin not, and I sometimes sin in my anger. When I get angry at the driver that pulled out in front of me and I called him an idiot or something along those lines, that is obviously the flesh taking over, and God is not pleased with it. At the same time, I am not going to try to argue that I am not under law, but grace, so I can call him or her nasty names and lose my sanctification and am doing nothing wrong. What I am speaking of is people trying to claim what they are doing is ok because we are under grace, so they feel they can excuse sinful behavior and claim to be innocent when they are not.

When I say that a person can prove their point and others will just ignore it, I mean they have easily won the debate. The other person has no arguments left. Everything they have tried has been debunked, yet they still won't even consider they may be wrong. There are even the instances where the person on the other side admitted what I said had merit, but then they just go on like that wasn't ever the case. An example would be how one lady came out on her own and said that women who wear jeans and slacks are dressing like a guy, yet she still wears jeans and slacks and defends it, saying we are not under law. Even those who can see it won't change their behavior because they are going to do what they are going to do. What is funny about that one lady is that we weren't even discussing that topic when she said that out of the blue. We were talking about hair length, and in her mind, she was defending people having any length of hair they want by making that comment about how women dress. Her point was that we can pretty much do as we please under grace, justifying doing something that goes against scripture.

Lets look at this thread, and what you have been saying. You have come against the OP for putting the emphasis on women and not mentioning men, and based on your comments to me, that could be considered whining. You spend a great deal of time discussing the outward appearance of women and men and modesty, and then you said I was placing all the emphasis on the outward man instead of the inner man. That is exactly what you did. I attempted to show how the real issue in the OP was a comparison of the outward man to the inner man, which to me, was placing far more emphasis on the inner man than most, including you. I most certainly did discuss the outward appearance, as that was the direction most were going, but even if we should place greater emphasis on the inner man, that doesn't mean we shouldn't put any emphasis on the outward appearance, and it doesn't mean God doesn't care about it.

@ @

,

O

[Estrella]

Oops the face didnt work lol