Christian Forums

Hey guys,

I know everyone teaches women should dress modestly, but what about men?

I'm having an issue with this. It's usually not a big deal for me, but there's one thing. Sometimes when it's hot I like to wear tank tops, and I don't know if that's right. My church would not really approve of it, so I guess I should not do it, I would never wear it around them as I know that would be wrong. But sometimes when I go to the gym or for a walk I wear them, and I wish I could just give them up if it's wrong. But I seem to have this urge to wear them, as it feels good on a hot day, but I don't believe if something feels good means we should do it.

Quote from: skater07 on Mon Jul 04, 2016 - 10:27:04My church would not really approve of it, so I guess I should not do it, I would never wear it around them as I know that would be wrong.

It matters little what a church may say, or not say; what does the scriptures teach should be our only care. We should never allow another man's conscience be our judge of what is right, or, wrong....and neither should be judge of another man in such trivial matters.

QuoteColossians 2:16-23~"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God. Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men? Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh."

I would be much more concern about why we wear what we do.  God looks at our hearts, not our clothing. A tank top may be all one poor man has, in which case, what should he do? I would tell him....go in peace my brother.

The Colossians 2:16-23 quote in the previous post is out of context.  It regards to Christians not following Jewish ceremonial and traditional laws. It's not about giving a middle-finger to your church and their understanding of godly values.

"Let no man therefore judge you in [non-kosher] meat, or in [non-kosher] drink, or in respect of an [Jewish] holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow [no longer apply] of things to come [and now have come] ... Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments [values] of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not [unclean things]; taste not [unclean things]; handle not [unclean things]; Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?"

If you belong to Christ, why do you dress with the immodestly of the world?

A man shouldn't wear tank tops or shorts to church.  Such dress at church is immodest, and immodestly is against the teaching of the Bible.  If it's hot, wear a tank-top around the house and yard.  But, when you leave for church, put on a sleeved shirt.

Quote from: Tertullian on Tue Aug 23, 2016 - 22:18:40

A man shouldn't wear tank tops or shorts to church.  Such dress at church is immodest, and immodestly is against the teaching of the Bible.  If it's hot, wear a tank-top around the house and yard.  But, when you leave for church, put on a sleeved shirt.

I don't think so, when it's 100f+ I'll be dressing cool and comfortable which will be shorts and a light shirt. Sweltering heat, humidity, and overdressing makes for "pew" while sitting in the Pews.

Quote from: Alan on Wed Aug 24, 2016 - 06:09:29

Quote from: Tertullian on Tue Aug 23, 2016 - 22:18:40

A man shouldn't wear tank tops or shorts to church.  Such dress at church is immodest, and immodestly is against the teaching of the Bible.  If it's hot, wear a tank-top around the house and yard.  But, when you leave for church, put on a sleeved shirt.

I don't think so, when it's 100f+ I'll be dressing cool and comfortable which will be shorts and a light shirt. Sweltering heat, humidity, and overdressing makes for "pew" while sitting in the Pews.

I agree, I don't think I have ever worn a tank top to church, but shorts, and a t-shirt for sure.  And if anyone does happen to wear a tank top to church, few would raise an eyebrow, most are just happy to have them join us in fellowship.

*shugs* Dude, girls go around here with so much under and side boob I don't think I've ever given it a second thought about myself, on a hot summer's day I don't think it's easy to sexualise a naked torso, male or female. I don't even where a shirt if it hits 35°C.

For those lacking common sense, we have dress codes.  Schools have them for students and tighter codes for teachers.  Employers have them.  Indecency laws are dress codes. It's sad that any business ever needed to post a sign "no shirt, no shoes, no service." 

But, lots of things are sad.  Crime, poverty, pollution...  It's sad that there are people who are just willing do the minimal they can get by with.  It's even sadder when they see nothing wrong with that. 

Quote from: Tertullian on Mon Aug 29, 2016 - 20:38:22It's sad that any business ever needed to post a sign "no shirt, no shoes, no service." 

Dude, a small shop abouts these parts in the summer has no shirt, no shoes, no service will probably have no business. In certain environments the appeal of the shirtless outweights the appeal of wet, smelly shirts

  Perhaps a man in shorts, t-shirt, and sandals, is more modestly dressed than a man in a suit with a gold watch and patent leather shoes.

Quote from: RB on Mon Jul 04, 2016 - 12:45:54
I would be much more concern about why we wear what we do.  God looks at our hearts, not our clothing. A tank top may be all one poor man has, in which case, what should he do? I would tell him....go in peace my brother.

I completely agree with this thought. Why is the question, and I feel this is applicable to both men and women.

Why do we dress this way? What is the heart intention behind it? If we walk around shirtless, with a chiseled chest and six pack, is it because we're hot or because we want to be noticed? Do we want to be noticed for what we have to "offer"? Or do we want to be noticed for who we are? (That is God fearing Christians.)

That being said, there is NOTHING wrong with a chiseled chest and six pack. God did create those after all. In the end, it's the heart attitude, if you are going to Church in a tank top because you want to be noticed, then the answer is decisively no. But if you go to Church in a tank top because the air conditioner broke, way to be wise. 

I hope this helps.

Quote from: mstevens on Tue Aug 30, 2016 - 11:29:45Why do we dress this way? What is the heart intention behind it? If we walk around shirtless, with a chiseled chest and six pack, is it because we're hot or because we want to be noticed? Do we want to be noticed for what we have to "offer"?

People dress like trash because they lack reverence or respect.  People dress sexy because they want to provoke lust in others.  How people dress reflects what's on the inside.

Before air conditioning and cheap clothes form China, it was a universal practice to dress very nicely for church.  Even today, if you go to a black church without air conditioning, and you can expect a room full of poor women in nice dresses and poor men in suits.  Now, we have well-off people in air conditioning making talking about heat and poverty as an excuse to dress like trash.  Their minds have become overcome with decadence.   

Good luck finding a tank top in a thrift store.

I prefer to buy baby formula and nappies Tertullian.

I think you misunderstood my question. I didn't say I would wear a tank top and shorts to church. I meant I wore them to the gym or going for walks, and I wouldn't wear them around people that I know from church because I didn't want them to be offended.  I would never wear anything like that to a worship service. I usually wear a suit to church, not that I would say one has to do so.

Tanktops are o'k ,  honestly we all have an intuition for this . I mean you wouldn't walk round town in swim shorts for example . Personally i wouldn't walk around without a T-shirt on in the summer . Although lot's of people do , i just think it shows a lack of consideration to other people. But Tanktop's and jogger bottoms/shorts on a hot day , go for it i say. It's what i would consider casual wear.

And like you said you wouldn't wear a tank top to church , it's not appropriate . But no doubt if your fellow church goers invited you and your family to a BBQ on a hot summer day in the park, you wouldn't go in a suit and tie now would you.

Quote from: WaylonSmithers on Fri Sep 09, 2016 - 01:37:19
Tanktops are o'k ,  honestly we all have an intuition for this . I mean you wouldn't walk round town in swim shorts for example . Personally i wouldn't walk around without a T-shirt on in the summer . Although lot's of people do , i just think it shows a lack of consideration to other people.

If you look at old photos, everyone dressed nicely.  Even in random street shots, everyone was dressed nicely.   What changed?  I suggest  mostly that we no longer have a Christian culture.  Consideration for other people has been replaced with immodest decadence.  Many people go to Church not to reverently worship God, but to consume the service (money-driven preachers are happy to sell services to such customers).

QuoteAnd like you said you wouldn't wear a tank top to church , it's not appropriate . But no doubt if your fellow church goers invited you and your family to a BBQ on a hot summer day in the park, you wouldn't go in a suit and tie now would you.

Maybe not a suit and tie, but I would be disinclined to invite a man to a BBQ if I thought he might wear a tank top to the BBQ.  If I'm hosting a social function, even a very causal social function, I still expect to see some class, not hairy arm pits. 

QuoteIf you look at old photos, everyone dressed nicely.  Even in random street shots, everyone was dressed nicely.   What changed?

Society.

Quote from: DaveW on Fri Sep 09, 2016 - 06:47:57

QuoteIf you look at old photos, everyone dressed nicely.  Even in random street shots, everyone was dressed nicely.   What changed?

Society.

If there were flooding, and someone asked what's causing the flooding, you'd say water.   


Desperately poor men standing in line at a soup kitchen in the 1920s, dressed better than most middle-class church-goers today.

But those men are probably also either looking for jobs or looking to keep their current evidently inadequate jobs also, looking at that shiney ground, probs trying to keep warm and dry from the wet weather. But I'm sure that, unlike now where people find excuses such as context and/or conditions, would dress any more laxed than that.






And I'm pretty sure if the use of elastic fabrics were even more wide spread there would be even less button-up business and more tees, hoodies, trackies and waistbands.

Quote from: Daemon Blackfyre on Fri Sep 09, 2016 - 10:42:26But those men are probably also either looking for jobs or looking to keep their current evidently inadequate jobs also,

Looking for jobs at a soup kitchen?

You can always find photos of slobs and very casually dressed people.  But, to show very causally-dressed people, if I had to resort to finding photos of young people doing hard labor outside, or playing at the beach, I'd hope I had enough intelligence to know I was only fooling myself.



Looking for a job at a job fair.  Do none of these forever-boys at least own a sport jacket?

....looking for jobs before or after they get some tucker. When you're looking for yakka you have a bit of a to do list, mate, especially then when you were selling some of your kids to a, you hoped, better life so their siblings could eat that night.

As well as the availability of elastic fabrics, the availability of cameras has also changed. And then there are thoe photos which were published. And then there were those which survived. I mean from 15th century europe we have surviving paintings of people wearing  cuirasses, hose and gowns. I don't think those were exactly readily available.

As for your picture, they all dress way better than I do. Actually, maybe some of them have the equivalent of the best clothes I have.

I think you need expectations lowered. Go into Google Images; type in "bogan" and press entered. Those are my people and that is what I have to wear because my parents bought most of my clothes, mostly from Kmart, Target, St Vincent and the Salvo Army.

Oh, I'm sorry, I should dress better because that's probably not an aesthetic you think looks good ergo isn't modest.

Quote from: Daemon Blackfyre on Fri Sep 09, 2016 - 11:28:26
I think you need expectations lowered. Go into Google Images; type in "bogan" and press entered. Those are my people

You define yourself with tattoos, beer, mangled clothes, and a bad haircut?  I imagine the people in those images not have a repulsive odor and poor command of the language.

Quoteand that is what I have to wear because my parents bought most of my clothes, mostly from Kmart, Target, St Vincent and the Salvo Army.

You can dress nicely no matter what your budget or where you buy clothes.  Try tucking in your shirt rather than ripping off the sleeves.

Quote
Oh, I'm sorry, I should dress better because that's probably not an aesthetic you think looks good ergo isn't modest.

Using that reasoning, you can dress however you want.  You can even wipe your butt with your hands and then lick your hands clean, if you're not going to worry about modesty.  (How can any man be considered civilized if doesn't use a bidet?  Maybe if he has no need of producing waste.)

There are universal standards of modesty.   It's not simply my opinion.  It's the opinion of every attractive girl you want to meet.  It's the opinion of every well-paying employer you want to work for.  And, if they put Christ first, it would also be the opinion of those at your church.

Quote from: Tertullian on Fri Sep 09, 2016 - 11:12:02



Looking for a job at a job fair.  Do none of these forever-boys at least own a sport jacket?

Thugs are some of the best dressers of today's society, stop being so judgemental and focus on your own shortcomings.

Quote from: Tertullian on Fri Sep 09, 2016 - 12:47:34And, if they put Christ first, it would also be the opinion of those at your church.

If churches that do that result in narrow-minded, judgemental people like you, I know which churches to avoid. How can one so concerned with such worldly definitions and standards of aesthetics and attire with a straight face acclaim to modesty?

"Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear— but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God's sight is very precious." 1 Peter 3:3-4

Quote from: Tertullian on Fri Sep 09, 2016 - 12:47:34

Quote from: Daemon Blackfyre on Fri Sep 09, 2016 - 11:28:26
I think you need expectations lowered. Go into Google Images; type in "bogan" and press entered. Those are my people

You define yourself with tattoos, beer, mangled clothes, and a bad haircut?  I imagine the people in those images not have a repulsive odor and poor command of the language.

We choose neither our homes nor our parents. I'm too young for tats and I wear my hair long in a ponytail but a shandy is nice on a hot day dude and yeah, I dress in donations, cheap resales and hand-me-downs.

Quote from: Tertullian on Fri Sep 09, 2016 - 12:47:34

Quoteand that is what I have to wear because my parents bought most of my clothes, mostly from Kmart, Target, St Vincent and the Salvo Army.

You can dress nicely no matter what your budget or where you buy clothes.  Try tucking in your shirt rather than ripping off the sleeves.

....make me.

Quote from: Tertullian on Fri Sep 09, 2016 - 12:47:34

Quote
Oh, I'm sorry, I should dress better because that's probably not an aesthetic you think looks good ergo isn't modest.

Using that reasoning, you can dress however you want.  You can even wipe your butt with your hands and then lick your hands clean, if you're not going to worry about modesty.  (How can any man be considered civilized if doesn't use a bidet?  Maybe if he has no need of producing waste.)

I rely on the dunny paper dude. I had to look up bidet. I know exactly zero people with one. Even cashed up cobbers not from this area. I'm talking fellas west of the Blue Mountains too, as well as the coast.

Also, all the people in India. Like a huge amount. The sorts that drop their dacks in the streets, not many dunny rags for them.

Quote from: Tertullian on Fri Sep 09, 2016 - 12:47:34
There are universal standards of modesty.   It's not simply my opinion.  It's the opinion of every attractive girl you want to meet.  It's the opinion of every well-paying employer you want to work for.  And, if they put Christ first, it would also be the opinion of those at your church.

Yes, universal and objective standards of modesty. This is why every culture  in history on this planet arrived at the button up shirt and belt-up slacks.

I have hit on girls pretty successfully with the gear I have

I went to my interview in a shirt and jeans. I am employed.

"And the LORD did say unto them 'thou shall't not sully yourself with the fabrics of the bogans nor the lads, dress not your wives in the attire of slags nor sheilas. Thous't adorn thyselves with modest clothes as defined by some middle class seppo a couple of millennia from now'. And so did the disciples go out in pleated trousers and collared shirts". Gospel  according to Tertullian: πδ - ζφ

Yeah, um, what? How is getting up in the attire you describe putting Christ first exactly? And how is it modest to spend more money on clothes?

Quote from: Enoch on Fri Sep 09, 2016 - 17:22:09If churches that do that result in narrow-minded, judgemental people like you, I know which churches to avoid. How can one so concerned with such worldly definitions and standards of aesthetics and attire with a straight face acclaim to modesty?

It's the refrain of the lost is to accuse the righteous of being narrow-minded and judgmental.  They don't want a light shined on what they do.

Quote"Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear— but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God's sight is very precious." 1 Peter 3:3-4

The is probably the first time in history that being a decadent slob is seen as a virtue by people professing faith in God.  It's also the first time in history a nation has ceased to be Christian, without the use of force against the people.   You see the two as unrelated.  I disagree. We have a generation of Christian men dressing like boys.

Peter addresses women (not men) who either dressed to show off, or were hypocrites who wanted to look nice on the outside, but weren't nice on the inside.   You did yourself a disservice in not adding the previous verse to your quote:   ESV 2 when they see your respectful and pure conduct.  KJV 2 While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear. (KVJ)  Where's your respectful/fearful manners and conduct that people can see?  Do you think wearing shorts or blue jeans to church demonstrates respectful/fearful conduct?

A woman should wear a long skirt and a head covering.  This has nothing to with braided hair and gold jewelry.  It's not honest to conflate the two. 

Quote from: Tertullian on Sat Sep 10, 2016 - 01:12:18
It's the refrain of the lost is to accuse the righteous of being narrow-minded and judgmental.  They don't want a light shined on what they do.

"Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment." John 7:24

You are literally judging adherence to God with fashion.

Quote from: Tertullian on Sat Sep 10, 2016 - 01:12:18The is probably the first time in history that being a decadent slob is seen as a virtue by people professing faith in God.

We had the whole fuedal system of Medieval Europe AND we have the whole hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. Gluttony and sloth are barely the virtues of today

Quote from: Tertullian on Sat Sep 10, 2016 - 01:12:18It's also the first time in history a nation has ceased to be Christian, without the use of force against the people.

We have a secular constitution. Do you wish to live in a theocracy? We have a million and one reason why forcing people to be religious tends to be a bad idea.

Quote from: Tertullian on Sat Sep 10, 2016 - 01:12:18You see the two as unrelated.  I disagree. We have a generation of Christian men dressing like boys.

Your post in this thread neglects slacks, an overcoat and a trilby

Quote from: Tertullian on Sat Sep 10, 2016 - 01:12:18ESV 2 when they see your respectful and pure conduct.  KJV 2 While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear. (KVJ)  Where's your respectful/fearful manners and conduct that people can see?  Do you think wearing shorts or blue jeans to church demonstrates respectful/fearful conduct?

I don't think it lacks it any. Do you think judging people who aren't wearing upper end clothes to Church? I think it's relevant if one is judged harshly for the clothes they have, likely due to their availability to them, by somebody with a tie and polished shoes. That is the point of quoting 1 Peter 3:3-4.

Quote from: Tertullian on Sat Sep 10, 2016 - 01:12:18A woman should wear a long skirt and a head covering.  This has nothing to with braided hair and gold jewelry.  It's not honest to conflate the two.

I'd bet you'd be the first one to jump on a young lady who comes inside with a hood up though.

I have irregular work so I go to church irregularly. However, last time I and my daughters sat by a young man who wore jeans and a hoodie. He was not out of place, there were many types of clothes, some richer and some poorer, but none were out of place. The dress they wore was the want to worship the Lord with their spiritual family, the Christian community. You know what I'm sure no one did? Judged others for their choice of dress. Everyone was covered, everyone was fine. The dressed to their capacity and came as they were.

Quote from: Enoch on Sat Sep 10, 2016 - 03:06:29"Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment." John 7:24

You are literally judging adherence to God with fashion.

You could have quoted 1 Thessalonians 5:22, but that would have worked against you.  So,  you misquoted John 7:24.  If things are as they appear, then judging by appearances is righteous.  But, that's not what Jesus meant.  Jesus meant not to judge by the appearance of the law (apart from righteousness), not the appearance of someone's behavior (which includes attire).  Try reading the context.

QuoteI don't think it lacks it any. Do you think judging people who aren't wearing upper end clothes to Church? I think it's relevant if one is judged harshly for the clothes they have, likely due to their availability to them, by somebody with a tie and polished shoes. That is the point of quoting 1 Peter 3:3-4.

This has nothing to with "upper end clothes".  It has to do with wearing slacks instead of jeans or shorts.  It has to do with tucking in a shirt.  It has to do with dressing to show respect, because you have respect.  Rather than dressing like a slob because you're a disrespectful, self-centered consumer. 

I don't judge anyone by what they wear, except to the extend that what they wear tells me who they are.  And, our culture and freedom suffers for it. 

Quote from: Tertullian on Sat Sep 10, 2016 - 04:20:07

You could have quoted 1 Thessalonians 5:22, but that would have worked against you.  So,  you misquoted John 7:24.  If things are as they appear, then judging by appearances is righteous.  But, that's not what Jesus meant.  Jesus meant not to judge by the appearance of the law (apart from righteousness), not the appearance of someone's behavior (which includes attire).  Try reading the context.

No, I don't think I did misquote. The whole thing, 21-24

Jesus answered them, "I did one miracle, and you are all astonished. But because Moses gave you circumcision, you circumcise a boy on the Sabbath (not that it is from Moses, but from the patriarchs.) If a boy can be circumcised on the Sabbath so that the Law of Moses will not be broken, why are you angry with Me for making the whole man well on the Sabbath? Stop judging by outward appearances, and start judging justly."

Attire, including the standards by which something is considered aesthetically pleasing, depend on the context of cultural convention, they are the equivalent of what is from the patriarchs. What clothes are what depends on not the objective law of God but on the people and times where, in this case, is the Anglo-American culture. Modesty, especially in terms of sexual suggestiveness, are objective seeing men and women generally look for similar things in terms of attractiveness and lust after the generally same sorts of areas. Modesty is in response to lust, there's actual law in that. How you do it has a lot more cultural influence behind it.

Quote from: Tertullian on Sat Sep 10, 2016 - 04:20:07This has nothing to with "upper end clothes".  It has to do with wearing slacks instead of jeans or shorts.  It has to do with tucking in a shirt.  It has to do with dressing to show respect, because you have respect.  Rather than dressing like a slob because you're a disrespectful, self-centered consumer. 

I don't judge anyone by what they wear, except to the extend that what they wear tells me who they are.  And, our culture and freedom suffers for it.

And on that 1 Thessalonians jab, observe everyone, the apparition of evil - never has there been a more terrible display of gluttony, sloth and sin.


Oh, wait, he looks like a pretty normal young man. B-b-but he's wearing jeans and hasn't tucked in his shirt! How could anyone wear something so immodest in a church?

I mean, I don't mean to mock but this is laughable. Those people in the line at the job fare? They were dressed fine. I would do a bit more at a job interview but if their resumes checked out and the prior employment referees gave good reviews than why not?

Oddly enough, one time where I mistook the thread on the women's forum and clicked on that thinking it was here, I read an interesting opinion suggesting that dressing up as you entail is less modest than just more everyday, comfortable wear.

You know, if I want to know who somebody is, I ask them to be quite honest. To be quite honest, the Jesus who surrounded himself with children, tax collectors, beggars and prostitutes probably would have had the same approach.

Quote from: Tertullian on Tue Aug 23, 2016 - 22:18:40A man shouldn't wear tank tops or shorts to church.  Such dress at church is immodest, and immodestly is against the teaching of the Bible.  If it's hot, wear a tank-top around the house and yard.  But, when you leave for church, put on a sleeved shirt.

I agree 100%~I well remembered when men never went anywhere in public except they were at their best~cothes, hair, etc. I remembered when men went to ballgames in suit and tie! How MUCH more should they do so when going to worship God? What did David do?

Quote2nd Samuel 12:20~"Then David arose from the earth, and washed, and anointed himself, and changed his apparel, and came into the house of the LORD, and worshipped: then he came to his own house; and when he required, they set bread before him, and he did eat.

Your clothes reveals the state of mind that you are in generally. A business man comes home and RELAXES with causal attire~why do he do this? He does not want to THINK and use his mind.

So today at church, the minister had under his liturgical garb, which was visible underneath *gasp* jeans and a poloshirt! BLUE DENIM FOR ALL THOSE WHO WOULD BUT LOOK AND THE SIGNS OF AN ELASTIC COTTON POLYESTER COLLAR ABOUT HIS NECK! The immorality of it all, he spat in the face of all which was modest and respectable. Such a brothel for sordid sin hath ye congregation of St Mary Uniting Church *spits*.

Yeah...no one cared. I'm sorry there are people in the world whose idea of respect and character is so contingent upon the sweat-shop manufactured bits of textile hanging off their bodies.

Quote from: Enoch on Sat Sep 10, 2016 - 05:42:12 Jesus answered them, "I did one miracle, and you are all astonished. But because Moses gave you circumcision, you circumcise a boy on the Sabbath (not that it is from Moses, but from the patriarchs.) If a boy can be circumcised on the Sabbath so that the Law of Moses will not be broken, why are you angry with Me for making the whole man well on the Sabbath? Stop judging by outward appearances, and start judging justly."

Reading stupid false-translations just makes the reader ignorant.  The Bible doesn't say "outward appearances." 

How do you agree with "outward appearances" from Jesus objecting to being judged for healing someone on the Sabbath?  What?  You think healing someone isn't what it looks like?  Has the denim gone to your brain? 

Elsewhere, Jesus tells us that the Sabbath is for man, not man for the Sabbath.  It's the interpretation of the law at issue here.  Jesus criticizes the Pharisees for following an interpretation of the law that is devoid of love or justice.  Obviously, Jesus is talking about the appearance of the law to the Pharisees, not one's outward appearance.

QuoteAttire, including the standards by which something is considered aesthetically pleasing, depend on the context of cultural convention, they are the equivalent of what is from the patriarchs. What clothes are what depends on not the objective law of God but on the people and times where, in this case, is the Anglo-American culture. Modesty, especially in terms of sexual suggestiveness, are objective seeing men and women generally look for similar things in terms of attractiveness and lust after the generally same sorts of areas. Modesty is in response to lust, there's actual law in that. How you do it has a lot more cultural influence behind it.

Many people where to church what many employers wouldn't allow them to wear to work.  So, I can't agree that dressing like a slob in church is okay because it's the cultural norm.  It's also the cultural norm to enjoy pornography, so does that make porn okay?  Also, I'm more concerned about ugliness than sexual suggestiveness.  But, my argument has been about displaying respect, not about other things.  If you go to church in jeans, it shows that you're a self-centered, self-righteous consumer of the service, probably with preferences for concert-style services. It's not that that jeans are sexually suggestive. 

It's simple, your attire reflects what's on the inside, and no amount of excuses for poor attire changes that.

See, now you're colouring it for no reason whatsoever.

Firstly, work gives me a uniform for safety reason. What I wear on my breaks, to and from or underneath the uniform they really don't care about.

What makes a button up shit tucked in with slacks and a belt any less consumerist than a t-shirt and a pair of jeans exactly? I'm pretty sure you buy both of them. What makes someone in jeans and a shirt look like a slob exactly? I would like to take a poll of people who thought that picture of the young man on the previous page was a slob on appearance alone, I'd be willing to bet my bottom dollar that mot would consider it almost absurd. What makes it uglier than somebody in a button up and slacks necessarily? What makes it so self righteous? So egotistic? So, um, a fan of a particular type of worship??? 

Once again, there is an objective moral attached to sexuality, marriage and relationships. Which is why I used it as an example of modesty in terms of dress. However, what is not objective is what types of materials that you do that with.

Your attire reflects the content of your wardrobe. Save for there being actual messages or symbols that explicitly tell you, I genuinely don't really gauge much from dress.

The thing is that there is no universal, objective edict across all cultures what is always poor attire. I've had enough of this discussion, I'm sorry your preferred dressed isn't currently in fashion because this is what this is ultimately sounding like.

Quote from: Enoch on Sat Sep 10, 2016 - 07:15:02Firstly, work gives me a uniform for safety reason. What I wear on my breaks, to and from or underneath the uniform they really don't care about.

Maybe if you're a mechanic, you wear a uniform for safety reasons.  Why do you even bother to make such desperate augments, when you know that other than dirty jobs, employers requires some level of professional dress?  I think even working at McDonald's, the employees have to wear black pants and a designated shirt.  See, when you're at work, to your employer, you're not there for yourself.  When dress like a casual slob, it's all about you.   The same applies to church, except most churches don't encourage proper Sunday attire.  Some even encourage self-centered attire, because their only interest is to get you in the door for your money, like a customer at McDonald's, rather than an employee at McDonald's.

Western Christianity has become culturally ineffective because most Christians have become mere consumers of religion rather than kingdom builders.  Attire is just a symptom.

Quote from: Tertullian on Sun Sep 11, 2016 - 04:37:16

Quote from: Enoch on Sat Sep 10, 2016 - 07:15:02Firstly, work gives me a uniform for safety reason. What I wear on my breaks, to and from or underneath the uniform they really don't care about.

Maybe if you're a mechanic, you wear a uniform for safety reasons.  Why do you even bother to make such desperate augments, when you know that other than dirty jobs, employers requires some level of professional dress?  I think even working at McDonald's, the employees have to wear black pants and a designated shirt.  See, when you're at work, to your employer, you're not there for yourself.  When dress like a casual slob, it's all about you.   The same applies to church, except most churches don't encourage proper Sunday attire.  Some even encourage self-centered attire, because their only interest is to get you in the door for your money, like a customer at McDonald's, rather than an employee at McDonald's.

Western Christianity has become culturally ineffective because most Christians have become mere consumers of religion rather than kingdom builders.  Attire is just a symptom.

I work at Maccas, we get given uniforms.

However, let's not compare jobs to church shall we, or employers to God. I think such a comparison cheapens the relationship between the Church and God to that of an exchange. Mate, that sucks everything on this side of the black stump. The customers just use Macca's for the food, the employees just use it as a means to gain monetary and employment history gain and they use us to fill the coffers of their share holders. It's co agreed slavery, devoid of love or mutual interest - a mechanism to exploit all other parties for own interest gain.

When I decided to give God a chance again just a few months ago, it wasn't to utilise salvation in exchange for preconditions. I needed an example, a counsellor, a friend who already got me and a parent that was actually a parent to me and something I could use as a scaffold to raise my own kid. Church feels more like a family home, a family that everyone contributes to because they love each other. Capitalism is a calculation, family is a relationship. I want to be neither God's employee nor his consumer. I want to be his child. Nothing I considered a parent demanded a uniform of me. I won't demand a uniform of my son. I know there are some ministers who wear liturgical gear if there's a thing which will have a notable attendence but it's for recognition for who is leading it and there's great freedom if they choose to do so or not because it's of their discression. Being of God doesn't mean you lose you as an individual, just like in a family having a last name doesn't mean you don't have a first.

And if you really think it's a symptom and not a cause than aren't you kinda barking up the wrong tree? I mean to be fairdinkum, I don't agree with your assessment of Christianity today but say that you were right - addressing symptoms doesn't do much. Think of somebody in sepsis. You can give them fluids to up their blood pressure, you can give them antipyretics to address their fever. You can give them bicarbonates to correct their acidosis. But as long as the infection stays, you're just covering the sepsis, you need antibiotics to address whatever is making that person septic. So if you think the symptom analogy is a good one, then dress is still not the problem.

Also, I think Enoch's point is that what you're describing wouldn't be the "uniform of God" because it evidently isn't. Employers tell you want to wear, to use that disgusting analogy, and are as specific or as broad with their dress code as they see fit. That's why my maths teacher wears a polo shirt and jeans one day and a hoodie and trousers the next - because those are both within his dress code. It is neither biblical imperative  nor objective property of the universe that a buttoned shirt tucked into a belt-up pair of trousers is the only expression of respectful attire, because that's only in a select set of contemporary cultures.

Why are you so desperate for this aesthetic as if the dress of the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant middle class of North America has been somehow ingrained into the tree of life?

Quote from: Daemon Blackfyre on Sun Sep 11, 2016 - 05:19:37The customers just use Macca's for the food,

McDonald's customers dress casually, often like slobs, because they're just consumers, only there for themselves.  And, the McDonald's employees are there for the money, but they have a dress code imposed on them by their employer.  They're paid to show customers respect, and therefor they have a dress code.

It's a fair point that the church should be like a family, not a business.  But, there are similarities.  A mere consumer of church offerings is like a consumer at McDonald's.  They dress casually because they're only there for themselves.   The more consumer-oriented a church is, the more casually dressed the parishioners are.

McDonald's employees adhere to a dress code out of motivation of wages.   A respectful parishioner who has respect would show that respect in attire without the motivation of wages. 

But, you wear jeans when you're just vegetating and watching TV and home?   A Church service isn't like vegetating in front of a TV.  It's more of a formal family gathering where guests in invited.  Maybe even more like a wedding feast.  Billy Bob's family might wear jeans to a wedding, but that's because his family is boorish.  A church should lift people up, not pull them down. 

The modern church is culturally ineffectual because the modern church is filled with mere consumers, and their attire shows it.  Church has become a business.  Pastors are getting degrees in marketing and communications then they calculate how to best entertain people to get people through the door.  When you wear jeans to church, you are treating attending Church like a visit to McDonald's. 

Notice the posts of people who disagree with me.  They self-centeredly declare that dressing casually is more comfortable.  They've taken verses out of context to rationalize their casual dress. My argument about the modern church being culturally ineffectual has gone unanswered.  Their posts bear witness against them.