YOUR Church has put a DRESS CODE in place!

[Running Gator]

21 minutes ago, Butero said:

OK.  Lets look at something that is not mentioned by name, pornography.  The Bible never mentions it.  Perhaps that is because they didn't have Playboy Magazines or DVD players back then.  Is it sin?  I know that lust is, but when I mention pornography by name, some might argue I am adding to the Word or that they can somehow watch it without lusting after the people in the films or magazines.  Something doesn't have to be mentioned by name to know it is wrong based on other things that are said. 

This is what I am telling you, and you can receive it or not.  I feel pretty sure you won't.  I am convinced that God revealed to me that what is taking place in regard to women's fashions is part of a bigger sin called rebellion against God's order.  It is all part of feminism.  It is all about women going away from their God given purpose and roles and becoming more like men.  The dressing like men is a symptom.  It is about women being co-equals, competitors if you will, rather than help-meets.  The short hair on some women is a sign of rebellion as well.  Women with long hair is a sign they are in submission to their head, as men with short hair shows they are in submission to their head, Jesus Christ.  The tattoo epidemic is Satan leading people to defile their temple and move away from their natural God-given image.  I seek God for answers when I see things taking place I can't explain, but in relating those things, when I can't show you something spelled out word for word in scripture, all I can do is give what I freely received and let the hearers decide if what I say is true.  We will all know one day, but in the meantime, you believe what I am telling you or you don't. 

I have always been a skeptic to anyone that claims a special revelation from God.  In my life experiences every time I have heard that it was a man's pride speaking and not God.  

The bottom line is that if you were born in a different culture your view of what is appropriate would be  very different than what it is now, based on that undeniable fact, I do believe you have placed yourself in God's role.

[Bob Carabbio]

On 4/7/2016 at 8:39 AM, kwikphilly said:

.What would you do? Would you leave or stay?.............Just curious..........

Leave, of course.  The pastor would have just proved that he doesn't HAVE A CLUE about what practical Christianity is all about, and it'd be VERY unlikely for him to be capable of giving real ministry, if "Dress codes" are that high on his "importance scale".

[LadyKay]

6 hours ago, Butero said:

I have left churches because they didn't have a dress code. 

Well that's just sad.

[LadyKay]

5 hours ago, Butero said:

The scripture says the woman is not to wear that which pertaineth to a man.

Do you also follow all the other laws in Deuteronomy. I've asked you that before I think. Cause if you are going to judge women who wear pants, then you yourself better be following every law of Deuteronomy.

[Running Gator]

9 hours ago, Butero said:

 

[Running Gator]

9 hours ago, Ezra said:

That term may not be in Scripture, but the concept certainly is. So you are right.  Things do not have to be specifically mentioned to make them right or wrong. The problem is that even when things are specifically mentioned, they are either dodged by some, or simply ignored.

The bible is not silent on how one should dress, but it is vague, and I believe that was intentional, as God does not do things by accident.   For Butero's view to be accurate it would mean that any Christian from a culture different than ours that does not follow his strict attire guidelines (notice they are his, not God's) is in fact sinning before God, actually doing what God finds an abomination.   If Butero's view is accurate,  Christian brothers and sisters living in American Samoa (and yes I do have friends that are Samoan and have moved back there to retire) are sinning by wearing what is culturally the norm.  

And then we are also stuck with deciding which group has it right, despite all his rigid views, it is very likely that Butero does not match the modesty of the Amish, so perhaps even he sinning in his attire.  But then again, some Amish are ok with men in short sleeved shirts and some are not, so which group of Amish should we go with?   Are the ones that are so immodest as to show their bare arms sinning based upon Butero's views?

[Running Gator]

9 minutes ago, Butero said:

I don't care if you are a skeptic or what you believe I am doing.  I am a skeptic as well, so I don't blame you for that.  When I hear people like you, I view them as spokesmen for the devil.  I am not saying you aren't a Christian and that you are a servant of Satan.  What I mean is that I see you being influenced by demonic spirits, and you as an unintentional advocate for the devil.  The only reason I am saying that is because you laid your cards on the table and said how you view people like me, so I am laying my cards on the table too.  That way we understand each other. 

I am not buying into your if I was in another time or place argument.  I am not.  I am in this time and place, and no matter how skeptical you are, I told you what I believe the Lord showed me, and nothing you say will change that.  You are free to disagree, because I can't prove what I said, but I stand by it just the same.  I have heard people speak prophetic words in the past, and go to the point of putting ,"thus saith the Lord" in front of it, and sometimes I received it and sometimes I did not receive it.  That is your right and responsibility to be cautious, since we are told to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling.  I don't care if you believe I have placed myself in the role of God.  God does have prophets.  There is no place in scripture where it says that ministry has ever ceased. 

I appreciate your honesty in your view of me, too many people rely on passive aggressive insults an get their feelings hurt when people say "mean" things to them.  I also appreciate that you do not go running to the Mods to cry because someone said something "mean" to you.  

 

[creativemechanic]

If your workplace changed dress code or yr school , youd follow it. Oswhy not church , unless its grevious or anti biblical

[LadyKay]

1 hour ago, creativemechanic said:

If your workplace changed dress code or yr school , youd follow it. Oswhy not church , unless its grevious or anti biblical

So what your saying is the church should follow what the world does. I see......

[Running Gator]

2 minutes ago, Butero said:

Modesty is important, but it is not as big of a deal as the need to wear clothing that pertains to your gender.  To wear clothing styles that do not match your gender is called an abomination.  You will find me far less rigid over how short or long a woman's dress is or whether or not a man wears a tank top shirt than some others.  While modesty is important, the word abomination is not used to describe one who is not modest, and the entire matter is subjective.  What one considers modest, another may not consider modest.  Abomination actually means something disgusting in the sight of God.  It even gets more descriptive than that in the definition, to the point where I could be called into question by the moderators if I was to go into what abomination really means. 

What pertains to a gender is still highly subjective and is 100% based upon the society in which you grew up.  We both seem to agree that a dress relates to a woman, yet to you jeans relate to a man but I, who have seen 6 decades on this earth, have never viewed them that way.  Yet you are more than willing to call women wearing jeans a sin, or an abomination even.   Had you grown up where I did you would have seen girls and women in jeans your entire life and very well may not think they relate to men only.