Are mullets allowed? We really need to bring that back for old times sake.
Posted on 06/09/2014 11:09:15 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
I believe that the show "19 Kids and Counting" is a very wholesome show, and more than worthy of watching.
This said, after the book, "Growing Up Duggar" came out, and after perusing it, I do believe that parts that talk abut hair lengths, clothing choices, etc, do perhaps need some discussion, given that there are some scriptural references stated within the book. And in reply:
1.) 1 Peter 3: 3-13 says:
"Whose adorning let it no be that outward adorning of plaiting 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 women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves being in subject unto their own husbands: evebn as sarah obeyed Abraham..."
While passages in the book refer to what Paul said, there has to be a proper hermeneutical and exegetical approach to this:
A.) If wearing gold, or plaiting of hair is condemned, then putting on of apparel (wearing clothes) is condemened, too. All three rise and fall together. This isn't what the passage talks about, though, as Peter would not have condoned walking around without clothes. What the passage shows is that the inward man being adorned is to be stressed in a Christian's life more than adorning the outward person.
B.) Genesis 24:53: When Abraham's servant went to look for a wife for Issac, he brought forth articles of silver and gold and gave them to Rebekah. Where would Rebekah have obtained this silver and gold jewelry? Obviously from Sarah via Abraham's servant. So Sarah adorned herself with silver and gold jewelry.
C.) In Moses time in Exodus 35: 20-29, when the wilderness tabernacle was being constructed, God told the children of Israel - those whose hearts were stirred by God - to bring forth those things for the construction of the tabernacle: It says that both men and women brought forth rings, nose rings, necklaces, etc (all jewelry of gold). Both men and women wore these things - even men and women who were Godly in heart.
2.) Showing the thigh shows nakedness? When Abraham made his servant swear that he would go back to Haran to look for a wife for Issac, Abraham made his servant place his hand on Abraham's thigh to seal the covenant that his servant wiould do as instructed by Abraham. (Genesis 24: 1-9).
3.) A man should not wear what women wear and vice versa? Yes... But in Moses time, women wore long sleeved tunics and robes for modesty, and wore more natural colors, while men wore short-sleeved robes and bright colors. They both wore robes --- it is just that there were robes for women to wear and robes for men to wear.
A.) Men and women can both wear pants, as long as men don't wear womens pants and vice versa.
B.) Men can wear kilts? Yes, as it is part of some cultures and is not a hindrance to winning souls for God in some cultures. Go back centuries and men wore stockings - even Godly men. Would I advocate this for today? Uh, a big fat NO. But God didn't senjd those men to hell for wearing stocking, wigs and powdering their faces. Times and cultures change...
C.) What do we do concerning those men who through the recent centuries past wore stocking, wigs, etc - even Goldy men? In their time and culture it wasn't a hindrance to winning souls for God. Doing such today would be a hindrance, with the exception I guess of wearing kilts, although wearing them would certainly not be for me personally.
And thus it comes down to that.
Long hair on a man in a culture (a culture that has no problem with this) would not be a hindrance for men winning souls for God in that culture, but in the U.S. it might very well be a hindrance depending upon the place. The same for short hair for women: The scriptures don't necessarily state how long is long or how short is short, other than Paul stating that a woman shorning was/is unacceptable.
In the end, if someone is invited to speak at a church that would frown on jewelry or even short sleeved dress shirts being worn (although wearing these articles doesn't bother that individual being asked to come and speak) they should nonetheless dress in such a way as to not offend. What good would it do for them to be preaching from behind the pulpit a message that God gave them, when the whole time people in the audience are stuck on looking at what they are wearing?
BTW, Straw Man on your part.
How can you prove that she is trying to entice men?
Only God can see the heart, and if God tells her that her shorts are long enough, then who are you to tell her (or him) otherwise? You were never be called to be the Spirit that she or any other person walks in so that they will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh.
And no circular reasoning, either: “If she were truly hearing from God she wouldn't wear shorts, because...”
Can't have women wear that which is enticing to men, can we!?
But who decides what is enticing...or isn't? God alone.
To you, seeing a woman's hair isn't enticing, but to many Muslim men it is. Christians taking the same path that Muslims take isn't a good road to trod.
We don't need to go down that road...
How shore it too short? How long is too long? Who would want to even get close to testing it? If you think your hair might be getting to long, cut it. If you think your hair is is getting close to too short, let it grow. If you think a skirt might be too short, don’t wear it. It’s not hard. If God said He doesn’t like men having short hair, why would you want to take the chance of having hair that’s too long? If God hates the blending of the sexes; if he wants men to be 100% men and women to be 100% women, why would you want to be 95% or 63%?
ok.
Did God tell you that a women who does not wear dresses or skirts is worldly? Did God tell you how short is short or how long is long? Is contemporary gospel music not Godly? What is or isn't contemporary?
Are you some Pope?
Be gone thou foul spawn of Satan! /sarcasm.
What you say about people who are influenced by Gothard doesn’t apply to the hundreds of Gothard people I know. It’s just in depth teaching of the Bible, it’s not a doctrine.
God is really smart, He knows how we work, He made His standards for a reason. Moving a fence that you didn’t build, is very dangerous.
Paul spoke of unity, but he also said there would be differentiation within that unity.
“Do not lust in your heart after her beauty or let her captivate you with her eyes.”
Thus saith Proverbs 6.
According to a sweeping application of the “weaker brother” principle....women should cover their eyes, because enticing with the eyes will cause men to sin. Especially (!) if that is all that she has left to show.
Obviously the weaker brother principle is applicable and it is Biblical and we can’t ignore it. But I think there is a point when church leadership can appropriately tell Christian men to grow up and to quit being the weaker brother (which might mean, quit lusting after women who allow some curves to be discerned, for example).
I do think that the main purveyors of modesty culture (Gothard and Doug Phillips) have learned over time to treat women as objects, and it appears that at least these two “conservative Christian leaders” acted out on their implicit beliefs that women are basically objects for men to rule over and dominate. I think they would be better off in Islam.
Have you heard of anyone saying that about Sarah? Have you heard the Duggars, or anyone else calling women who wear jewelery sinners? What is the symbol for the women’s restroom? What is the symbol for men’s? That should really end the debate. In western culture, women wear dresses and skirts. They started wearing pants as an egalitarian statement. Is that not true?
yep, true.
But there are hundreds if not thousands who became trapped in a snare of perfectionism and indecision, and a complete ability to do anything in life, because they need the authority in their life to do X Y or Z. Strange that something called Institute of Basic Life Principles kept people from coping with the basics of life.
Then there is the whole sexual harassment thing which we need not even get into.
Not everyone was affected by Gothard negatively. But I think that is more of his legacy than those who have gone on to really excel in the Christian life. I think if you do some searches online, you will find that to be the majority story out there. It is certainly my experience of talking with people who were seriously into it. (In fact...now that I think about it...that is my experience without exception. Not that my experience is everyone’s. But I don’t know anyone who went through Gothard stuff that didn’t have to detox. Some a little. But a few, it took years).
Where in the Bible does it say that women should wear dresses?
They weren't around in OT or NT times.
Men should wear mens cloting and womens womens clothing?
1.) Men and women both wore robes in OT times. Uh oh, they wore the same clothing.
2.) Sarah wore jewelry, and yet Peter gave her as the example for Holiness for women to follow.
3.) Paul does not state how long is truly too long concerning hair length.
Holiness people need to take note. Gonna have to give up this man-made holiness...
You are implying that mullets are out at the moment.
(Wait...have I missed something?)
I can't; that's between her spirit and the Holy Spirit. But when my 17yo lovely-legged daughter discusses with her father the issue of displaying her lovely legs, I tell her the same two things I told you: first, that she should ask herself whether any part of her motivation is that she wants men to be looking at her as a sex object, and second, that she should realize that the more thigh she shows, the more men are going to think of her sexually, when Jesus proclaimed that looking at a woman with porneia in one's heart is the equivalent of committing adultery. It then becomes an issue, spiritually speaking, between her and God. Eventually, when she leaves home, it will be her own choice.
And thus you go down the Burqa road...
In Edo-era Japan, a woman was covered from her neck to her feet in a kimono; men were enticed to sexual thoughts by seeing the nape of a woman's neck, which was all he could see. Fighting lust, whether sexual or otherwise, is always a rearguard action; this is why the grace of God is so vast, because our sin is so vast.
The weaker brethren principal is so misunderstood. The weaker brother is not the person with standards, it’s the new Christian who just got saved from the world. The people with standards are the ones who get the weaker brother principal. The mature Christians who ignore standards are guilty of causing “the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died”. That’s a serious charge. God is not suppress your liberty so those fuddy duddy holiness kooks don’t get offended. He’s saying, be like those fuddy duddies so new Christians don’t get offended.
No. We started wearing because they are warm and comfortable .
excellent point on weaker brother....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.