The Old Paths

[Mathew Ward]

The Old-Paths

B. Modesty

If I had a dime for every time I have been called a legalist I could buy another bus for our bus ministry. I believe the Scripture is clear in relation to dress standards?modesty and distinction. Every preacher, every ministry and every Christian has some level of dress standards. So let?s not deceive ourselves regarding this topic. As old-paths preachers our first desire for men and women in our churches is that we have a heart for God and have a Christ-like spirit. Our yieldedness to the Lord in this area simply reveals our heart. Ask yourself this question, how is your spirit when you discuss the area of dress standards? Are you defensive or are you yielded to whatever the Lord would have you to do? Why should a ministry support and promote men who change in this area? And finally why would those who do not hold to these dress standards demand that we accept their decisions and extend to them the liberty to make such decisions but not respect our decision to keep our dress standards where they have always been. You simply can?t have it both ways.

The problem is that those with "dress standards" so often mock and ridicule those who don't hold to their standards, and imply that they are un-spiritual and not right with God.  Modesty is a matter of the heart as much as anything else.  The Scriptures clearly tell all Christians to dress modestly; the problem (in my opinion) is when leaders undertake to define modesty on behalf of the people instead of encouraging them to ask the Holy Spirit to reveal what is modest.

I do not believe we should mock or ridicule but should stand on what we believe the Scripture teaches. Personally, I have experienced much more ridicule and scorn from those on the "other side" of this issue than I have ever seen from those who have "standards"
Shouldn't leaders lead in all areas of the Scripture. It seems as though there is an expectation that pastors should be silent on the issue of modesty and distinction. I believe we should preach the whole counsel of God.

Define modesty.

Isn't that the whole problem? 

It is when we bring in an extra-biblical definition and then application.

But when I really start to look at the Scriptures and rightly apply them then hopefully I will correct any errors I have been taught or believe.

So give us the extra-biblical definition and application of modesty...

Those who hold to tradition, like a 1950's dress standard, and oppose those who think it is outdated. Like the following...

"Why should a ministry support and promote men who change in this area? And finally why would those who do not hold to these dress standards demand that we accept their decisions and extend to them the liberty to make such decisions but not respect our decision to keep our dress standards where they have always been. "

The Christian life is a life of change.

Show me where I said I hold to tradition. I believe in modesty and distinction. These principles were not founded in the 1950's. They are rooted in Scripture. I do not believe culture determines right and wrong. The Word of God determines this. The Bible is our sole and only authority for truth. The Christian life is not a life of change. Truth does not change. Right and wrong does not chhttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dy9nwe9_xzw
Where to do you believe dress crosses the line of biblical modesty and distinction?

Is it ok for a man to where spandex?
Is it ok for a man to where a skirt?
Is it ok for a woman to wear a bikini? a one piece bathing suit?
Is it ok for a woman to wear pants if there are not tight?
It is ok for a man to cross dress? how about a woman?
Is it ok for a woman to wear a short skirt? How long or short?
Is it ok for a man to wear makeup? Wear earrings?
Is it ok for a woman to wear a tight skirt? How tight is ok?

These are questions I have gotten from folks...how about you answer them...do you believe the Bible has the answer?

My comment that you quote asks the question I ask of you...

I will answer your questions when I have time later today.

But you said "The Christian life is not a life of change."

I am not sure you thought this through. But to put it another way. Are you the same as when you trusted Christ or have you changed?

Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. 2 Corinthians 5:17

Since God is in the process of making all things new...that is change.

So I reiterate...the Christian life is all about change.

 

[bgwilkinson]

Whatever happened to growth in grace?

Sounds like constant change.

 

[Ransom]

This isn't right.  When I dress, eat, drink, or whatsoever I do in the way that I understand God commands (being obedient), that is NEVER legalism.

You're right. It's not legalism to seek to obey God's commands.  If you feel that your obedience requires that you dress in a certain manner, then do so.

However, that doesn't give anyone the right to take their own application of a scriptural principle and elevate it to the level of the principle itself.  Perhaps someone else has thought the same biblical issue through and come to a different application. That doesn't necessarily make them less pious. Taking your preferences and making them laws is the essence of Phariseeism - and that certainly is legalism.

 

[subllibrm]

FWIW professional male athletes wear spandex all the time.

 

[wtyson]

The Old-Paths

B. Modesty

If I had a dime for every time I have been called a legalist I could buy another bus for our bus ministry. I believe the Scripture is clear in relation to dress standards?modesty and distinction. Every preacher, every ministry and every Christian has some level of dress standards. So let?s not deceive ourselves regarding this topic. As old-paths preachers our first desire for men and women in our churches is that we have a heart for God and have a Christ-like spirit. Our yieldedness to the Lord in this area simply reveals our heart. Ask yourself this question, how is your spirit when you discuss the area of dress standards? Are you defensive or are you yielded to whatever the Lord would have you to do? Why should a ministry support and promote men who change in this area? And finally why would those who do not hold to these dress standards demand that we accept their decisions and extend to them the liberty to make such decisions but not respect our decision to keep our dress standards where they have always been. You simply can?t have it both ways.

The problem is that those with "dress standards" so often mock and ridicule those who don't hold to their standards, and imply that they are un-spiritual and not right with God.  Modesty is a matter of the heart as much as anything else.  The Scriptures clearly tell all Christians to dress modestly; the problem (in my opinion) is when leaders undertake to define modesty on behalf of the people instead of encouraging them to ask the Holy Spirit to reveal what is modest.

I do not believe we should mock or ridicule but should stand on what we believe the Scripture teaches. Personally, I have experienced much more ridicule and scorn from those on the "other side" of this issue than I have ever seen from those who have "standards"
Shouldn't leaders lead in all areas of the Scripture. It seems as though there is an expectation that pastors should be silent on the issue of modesty and distinction. I believe we should preach the whole counsel of God.

Define modesty.

Isn't that the whole problem? 

It is when we bring in an extra-biblical definition and then application.

But when I really start to look at the Scriptures and rightly apply them then hopefully I will correct any errors I have been taught or believe.

So give us the extra-biblical definition and application of modesty...

Those who hold to tradition, like a 1950's dress standard, and oppose those who think it is outdated. Like the following...

"Why should a ministry support and promote men who change in this area? And finally why would those who do not hold to these dress standards demand that we accept their decisions and extend to them the liberty to make such decisions but not respect our decision to keep our dress standards where they have always been. "

The Christian life is a life of change.

Show me where I said I hold to tradition. I believe in modesty and distinction. These principles were not founded in the 1950's. They are rooted in Scripture. I do not believe culture determines right and wrong. The Word of God determines this. The Bible is our sole and only authority for truth. The Christian life is not a life of change. Truth does not change. Right and wrong does not chhttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dy9nwe9_xzw
Where to do you believe dress crosses the line of biblical modesty and distinction?

Is it ok for a man to where spandex?
Is it ok for a man to where a skirt?
Is it ok for a woman to wear a bikini? a one piece bathing suit?
Is it ok for a woman to wear pants if there are not tight?
It is ok for a man to cross dress? how about a woman?
Is it ok for a woman to wear a short skirt? How long or short?
Is it ok for a man to wear makeup? Wear earrings?
Is it ok for a woman to wear a tight skirt? How tight is ok?

These are questions I have gotten from folks...how about you answer them...do you believe the Bible has the answer?

My comment that you quote asks the question I ask of you...

I will answer your questions when I have time later today.

But you said "The Christian life is not a life of change."

I am not sure you thought this through. But to put it another way. Are you the same as when you trusted Christ or have you changed?

Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. 2 Corinthians 5:17

Since God is in the process of making all things new...that is change.

So I reiterate...the Christian life is all about change.

If you are saying growing is changing we agree...if we are changing our principles to conform to culture that is wrong. 

 

[wtyson]

Whatever happened to growth in grace?

Sounds like constant change.

Different...

 

[wtyson]

This isn't right.  When I dress, eat, drink, or whatsoever I do in the way that I understand God commands (being obedient), that is NEVER legalism.

You're right. It's not legalism to seek to obey God's commands.  If you feel that your obedience requires that you dress in a certain manner, then do so.

However, that doesn't give anyone the right to take their own application of a scriptural principle and elevate it to the level of the principle itself.  Perhaps someone else has thought the same biblical issue through and come to a different application. That doesn't necessarily make them less pious. Taking your preferences and making them laws is the essence of Phariseeism - and that certainly is legalism.

First...great to talk to you again Scott...been a long time.

The issue is that if the Bible teaches modesty and distinction which I believe it does...then it is not preference but principle. 

 

[T-Bone]

Appropriate for the occasion.

What would your dress standards be for men and women?

While an "occasion" would drive the style that is approporiate, I do not believe modesty should be affected by an occasion.

I believe modesty requires a man or woman to not wear tight or revealing clothes.

I believe distinction says that men dress as men and women as women. This is where the topic of woman and pants comes in.

Simple application of modesty and distinction. This is not legalism as it has nothing to do with salvation. It is a simple application of biblical principles of dress.

Hope this helps explain further.

The principle of legalism would be doing something to earn God's favor. So when folks dress a certain way (like women only wearing dresses) in order to be right with God it is then  legalusm.

As far as tight or revealing clothing what verses are you apealing to? And what body parts are ok to be revealed?

What do you think are distict clothes for women to wear are?

Today I wore shorts, polo style shirt and sperry"s to staff meeting. Totally approriate for the occasion.

The legalist in the church don't want anyone to believe they are indeed legalist, so they have assigned legalism in their minds as only being associated with salvation.  A very narrow, self-serving definition that allows them to demand legalistic standards in the church without they themselves being guilty of legalism.  So folks, legalism is in the church the same as liberalism is in the church, and neither one is solely in the realm of salvation!

So anyone who believes the Bible teaches in modesty and distinction is a legalists...got it.

Apparently you don't got it...I never said that. It is those man made requirements that are added to be right with God that are legalistic...and it is the misapplied Scripture to control people's actions, like the Pharisee's did that is legalism. Hope now you got it!

 

[Ransom]

The issue is that if the Bible teaches modesty and distinction which I believe it does...then it is not preference but principle.

The principle is modesty and distinction, but the Bible goes to virtually no lengths to define what those terms actually mean practically. Well, Paul does talk about female modesty, but as distinguished from showy clothing and hairstyles that show off her wealth (1 Tim. 2:9-10).

And so since the Bible doesn't lay out any firm rules for a) modesty (in the sense of covering up) or b) what constitutes distinctly male or female dress, it's left to us to think that through and use our God-given wisdom to decide for ourselves how best to please him.  Distinction is especially interesting, since when Moses wrote not to wear the clothing of the other sex (Deut. 22:5), both men and women wore robes. We're really not all that different, except that instead of robes, it's trousers.

 

[Mathew Ward]

As I said modesty is appropriate for the occasion.

Is it ok for a man to where spandex?

Football players wear them all the time.

Is it ok for a man to where a skirt?

Ever hear of a kilt?

Is it ok for a woman to wear a bikini? a one piece bathing suit?

At the beach, that is what they wear or at the swimming pool.

Is it ok for a woman to wear pants if there are not tight?

Sure, why can't a women wear pants? 

It is ok for a man to cross dress? how about a woman?

I don't know what you mean by cross dress. Please define.

Is it ok for a woman to wear a short skirt? How long or short?

I don't have a problem with it.

Is it ok for a man to wear makeup? Wear earrings?

Anchors and sports casters wear makup all the time. Is there a problem?
Earrings would be fine unless they are simply showing off their money, then would go against the Bible.

Is it ok for a woman to wear a tight skirt? How tight is ok?

All of these examples would fit into the definition of modesty being appropriate for the  occasion.

If these are the issues that the people you pastor are bringing to you then you are majoring on the wrong issues. In this area a believer from the heart should ask the Holy Spirit for guidance.

As far as where have you said you hold to tradition. When you make comments like this you are holding to tradition. "And finally why would those who do not hold to these dress standards demand that we accept their decisions and extend to them the liberty to make such decisions but not respect our decision to keep our dress standards where they have always been."

Please go back and answer the same questions you asked of me,

 

[bgwilkinson]

As I said modesty is appropriate for the occasion.

Is it ok for a man to where spandex?

Football players wear them all the time.

Is it ok for a man to where a skirt?

Ever hear of a kilt?

Is it ok for a woman to wear a bikini? a one piece bathing suit?

At the beach, that is what they wear or at the swimming pool.

Is it ok for a woman to wear pants if there are not tight?

Sure, why can't a women wear pants? 

It is ok for a man to cross dress? how about a woman?

I don't know what you mean by cross dress. Please define.

Is it ok for a woman to wear a short skirt? How long or short?

I don't have a problem with it.

Is it ok for a man to wear makeup? Wear earrings?

Anchors and sports casters wear makup all the time. Is there a problem?
Earrings would be fine unless they are simply showing off their money, then would go against the Bible.

Is it ok for a woman to wear a tight skirt? How tight is ok?

All of these examples would fit into the definition of modesty being appropriate for the  occasion.

If these are the issues that the people you pastor are bringing to you then you are majoring on the wrong issues. In this area a believer from the heart should ask the Holy Spirit for guidance.

As far as where have you said you hold to tradition. When you make comments like this you are holding to tradition. "And finally why would those who do not hold to these dress standards demand that we accept their decisions and extend to them the liberty to make such decisions but not respect our decision to keep our dress standards where they have always been."

Please go back and answer the same questions you asked of me,

Now that is called common sense.

 

[BALAAM]

One of the things that many of you don't realize when you get into the ifb dress standards is that there is no real standard. Once you enter that realm you discover that no matter if your wife only wears skirts and cullottes, they will be the wrong pattern or the wrong kind or 'we don't wear those!" You can have a cheerleader who must have her uniform sewn by a school approved seamstress and have them tried on and approved 14 times and they will still come home with demerits for too short, too tight, too something. There is always someone trying to outdo everyone else.

Haircuts; Same thing. No matter how short your hair or even if you go to the same barber all of the other students and faculty go to you will still get demerits for have blocked hair or not approved haircut.

I graduated from hac and went to fbch for 25 years and you get to know people. There were older church lady employees who would get letters and reprimands because their blouse was not modest enough or they were seen in public not wearing panty hose or some such nonsense. I never could get comfortable, even though I tried, because I never could figure out the rules.

We had an adult Sunday School activity where our class was going on a cruise in Florida somewhere. I asked the teacher what in the world they did on a cruise if you can't swim or go in the water. That was absolutely a no-no. He said Oh we all go swimming etc. I asked how they managed that and he said that all of the women wore mens bathing trunks and shirts. Wasn't there another group of folks in the NT who were constantly concerned with their 'standards'?

 

[BALAAM]

I have such a difficult time understanding a lot of this stuff. Let's take evangelism. Romans Road, soul-winning, altar calls, etc. Everyone bragging about how many people they had saved and prayed the prayer on twitter etc. Good so far right? The next tweet is one of these old paths knuckleheads saying that if you left fundamentalism because you thought it was too hard you need to just get saved.

Could you imagine if you were an alien or raised by wolves and just got into this stuff and trying to make sense of it, what a difficult time you would have?  "The Bible means what it says and says what it means!?  Cast your bread upon the waters, This IS my body, This IS my blood, etc. I came to the conclusion that if I were an alien and needed understanding of what the Bible is trying to teach that I probably not find it with most of these 'old paths' guys.

 

[NorrinRadd]

Scripture uses the term "modest" (aidos) exactly one time -- 1 Tim. 2:9.  In that context, the primary meaning is that women are not to dress in ways that flaunt their wealth or social status.  By definition, then, any other meaning we ascribe to "modest" comes from outside Scripture.

In the OT, rules about "distinction" were primarily either about the food laws, or applied only to priests; both of these have been done away and are now irrelevant.  In the NT, within the Church, "distinctions" are viewed unfavorably.  In terms of "Church" vs. "world," the thing that is to mark us (IOW distinguish us) is John 13:35.

Galatians, esp. ch. 3, shows that we continue and progress in our Christianity the same way we entered in the first place -- by faith, not deeds and rules.

 

[BALAAM]

Ok, after the Sunday hit parade from the 'old paths' folks you would think that America has had revival and nearly everyone in America has gotten saved. I know you think I am embellishing but I would just ask you to go and read all the tweets from the twits. Altars were full, tons saved, and scores baptized. Let's have a funeral for 'dead churches' etc.

I am kind of glad for it, kind of question it, and kind of sick at all the bravado from the old paths guys. Just put your money where your mouths are. (it will never happen)

 

[wtyson]

Ok, after the Sunday hit parade from the 'old paths' folks you would think that America has had revival and nearly everyone in America has gotten saved. I know you think I am embellishing but I would just ask you to go and read all the tweets from the twits. Altars were full, tons saved, and scores baptized. Let's have a funeral for 'dead churches' etc.

I am kind of glad for it, kind of question it, and kind of sick at all the bravado from the old paths guys. Just put your money where your mouths are. (it will never happen)

Thankful for any ministry that is seeing being saved.  Frankly, it is refreshing to hear the reports from around the country of what God is doing...better than watching the depressing news....

What do you mean by "put your money where your mouths are. (It will never happen)

Thanks!

 

[BALAAM]

Ok, after the Sunday hit parade from the 'old paths' folks you would think that America has had revival and nearly everyone in America has gotten saved. I know you think I am embellishing but I would just ask you to go and read all the tweets from the twits. Altars were full, tons saved, and scores baptized. Let's have a funeral for 'dead churches' etc.

I am kind of glad for it, kind of question it, and kind of sick at all the bravado from the old paths guys. Just put your money where your mouths are. (it will never happen)

Thankful for any ministry that is seeing being saved.  Frankly, it is refreshing to hear the reports from around the country of what God is doing...better than watching the depressing news....

What do you mean by "put your money where your mouths are. (It will never happen)

Thanks!

Let me explain. I was a member of FBCH for 25 years and graduated from hac. On a Sunday night several years ago one of our members had a visitor who was either a new christian or yet unsaved even though he had been there a couple of times before. This guy was showing the visitor around and as they were standing at the railing he told him that we had baptized over 10,000 people a year for the past couple of years. The guy just looked around and asked in an innocent voice, "Where are they?"

Just in the past couple of months I have started reading some of the twitter feeds from prominent ifb evangelists, pastors, etc. and it is just "Oh my goodness!" You will have a hard time finding an olympic gold medalist or professional athlete with more bravado than these guys. "God showed up in our service! Altars full and warm all day! Hundred saved! Decisions made!"

Now, I am fine and good with all of it but then why do so many of the churches look so sparce? Why are their bible colleges dying slow deaths? Enough bragging already.

 

[sword]

I agree with the bragging issue. You can say you had a Good meeting and many were saved without going to that extreme. Its the holy spirit that must do the work, not the preacher.

That being said I am reminded that Jesus healed 10 lepers yet only 1 returned to thank him. There were thousands baptized several different times in the Book of acts but it is not likely they all became regular church attenders.

As I work with people in the inner city near our church, I meet people every month who were saved in our church as a child or teen. They give a clear testimony of trusting Jesus, but have fell out of church or attend elsewhere. I ask, were they not saved? Was it just a prayer with no conviction or repentance. If they profess to having put their trust in Jesus Christ & the price he paid for their sins to get them to Heaven, I say they are saved.

 

[bgwilkinson]

Ok, after the Sunday hit parade from the 'old paths' folks you would think that America has had revival and nearly everyone in America has gotten saved. I know you think I am embellishing but I would just ask you to go and read all the tweets from the twits. Altars were full, tons saved, and scores baptized. Let's have a funeral for 'dead churches' etc.

I am kind of glad for it, kind of question it, and kind of sick at all the bravado from the old paths guys. Just put your money where your mouths are. (it will never happen)

Thankful for any ministry that is seeing being saved.  Frankly, it is refreshing to hear the reports from around the country of what God is doing...better than watching the depressing news....

What do you mean by "put your money where your mouths are. (It will never happen)

Thanks!

Let me explain. I was a member of FBCH for 25 years and graduated from hac. On a Sunday night several years ago one of our members had a visitor who was either a new christian or yet unsaved even though he had been there a couple of times before. This guy was showing the visitor around and as they were standing at the railing he told him that we had baptized over 10,000 people a year for the past couple of years. The guy just looked around and asked in an innocent voice, "Where are they?"

Just in the past couple of months I have started reading some of the twitter feeds from prominent ifb evangelists, pastors, etc. and it is just "Oh my goodness!" You will have a hard time finding an olympic gold medalist or professional athlete with more bravado than these guys. "God showed up in our service! Altars full and warm all day! Hundred saved! Decisions made!"

Now, I am fine and good with all of it but then why do so many of the churches look so sparce? Why are their bible colleges dying slow deaths? Enough bragging already.

This is simply marketing hype generated to get more profitable meetings.

Pastors see this and think wow maybe I can get some of that in my church and they schedule the guy for meetings.

This method has been common for many years.

We just brought it to a new level at FBCH.

 

[Bruh]

I agree with the bragging issue. You can say you had a Good meeting and many were saved without going to that extreme. Its the holy spirit that must do the work, not the preacher.

That being said I am reminded that Jesus healed 10 lepers yet only 1 returned to thank him. There were thousands baptized several different times in the Book of acts but it is not likely they all became regular church attenders.

As I work with people in the inner city near our church, I meet people every month who were saved in our church as a child or teen. They give a clear testimony of trusting Jesus, but have fell out of church or attend elsewhere. I ask, were they not saved? Was it just a prayer with no conviction or repentance. If they profess to having put their trust in Jesus Christ & the price he paid for their sins to get them to Heaven, I say they are saved.

If there has never been any fruit of righteousness, they are suspect and IMO, should be challenged.