So what’s the hard fast rule? Tell us the specifics. If it’s in there then you owe it to your brothers to correct us in our error.
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
What do you consider modesty on a woman? What makes a woman appear NOT modest?
- Thread starter Mrs.HisPossession
- Start date
-
- Tags
- makeup modesty womens clothing
This is a great point that we confuse modesty and submission because there is a strong difference between the two. A modest woman in dress can be extremely disrespectful to her husband at the same time in attitude.
You are right, the context is godliness. But that doesn't magically cancel the words Paul uses. One of the key ways Paul instructs women to work out their godliness is by not dressing in ways that are immodest, indiscreet, or shameful.
I would have at least partially agreed with you until @Mrs.Starr pointed out the scripture (Isaiah 47:2-3) that demonstrates God sees uncovering the hair as shameful. That is not without foundation; does not even nature teach you that hair is sexually alluring?
"Appropriate to the occasion" is not the definition of modest. That's not the English definition and it's not the definition of the words used in the text (here or here). You keep repeated that without actually demonstrating it.
Do not wear clothing that is indiscreet, i.e. draws attention, nor clothing that is immodest or shameful; i.e. is sexually alluring. You all know what it means.
Just to inject a little humor...
I love Masterpiece Theater that runs on our local PBS station. They are starting a new series based on a work by Jane Austen called Sandotin. Of course it's a period novel and the ladies are all dressed totally covered. Two young ladies strike up a friendship and are laughing and wading in a lake when a chaperone (old stuffy woman) finally discovers them and gives them a toungue lashing over exposing their ankles and panteloons to whomever might happen to pass by. Oh if only that was all we had to worry about today!
I love Masterpiece Theater that runs on our local PBS station. They are starting a new series based on a work by Jane Austen called Sandotin. Of course it's a period novel and the ladies are all dressed totally covered. Two young ladies strike up a friendship and are laughing and wading in a lake when a chaperone (old stuffy woman) finally discovers them and gives them a toungue lashing over exposing their ankles and panteloons to whomever might happen to pass by. Oh if only that was all we had to worry about today!
This is true. MANY of us women do not know what shame faced is or what it even looks like. They do not preach women's conduct and dress according to scriptures in most congregations. Sometimes I suspect the reason is fear. It seems pastors and elders leading flocks are scared to tell women we are out of order. Not all, but most. This makes it harder for women who actually want to get in order but when you come out of the world, its overwhelming to know how far down the rabbit hole you've gone. I know feminism is the culprit, but it surprises me even amongst the most die hard congregations, you see the women seem out of order, even if innocently from lack of knowing. Not all women, but many of us. I'm not giving myself a pass either. I'm just desperate to know and change to what is pleasing to Yeshua and not the tradition of man.
How would you define shamefacedness?
Which is a completely subjective standard. There is no hard and fast rule there. Absolutely no one here disagrees that women should dress modestly. You claimed you knew what that meant. I would like to know what the specifics are. Should they be modestly dressed for the strictest of cultures at its strictest point? A modest woman in Rio De Janeiro would look like a raging slut in Saudi Arabia. You haven’t told us which is in the right.
A woman in knee length khakis and an appropriately sized polo shirt would not seem immodest in most settings in America. I can post you a picture of a woman in a floor length gown that covers wrist and throat that is stupidly immodest. We’ve all seen nun habits that have been sexed up and two piece bathing suits that are surprisingly concealing.
So what is this specific commands you’ve found that gives an objective standard? Because everything I’ve seen is subjective in the extreme.
It is extremely sexy when a physically attractive woman wears lingerie that fits her correctly and shows off her curves. This would be inappropriate for her to do while going to the grocery store but it would be completely appropriate for her to do while in a hotel room with her new husband on her wedding night. This is not a hard concept to understand.
If modesty really does mean "non sexy" then you would be prohibiting the example I just gave. Paul does not include an exception here for when a woman is alone with her husband.
Why wouldn't the lack of submission evidenced by the uncovering be just as valid a reason for the shame? Isaiah 47:2-3 does not have a sexual element that I can find... they are shamed but why does that mean they are viewed sexually?
I'm addressing the English word modesty as its commonly used in fundamentalist circles such as independent Baptist which is what I am familiar with. The term is only translated as modesty in 1 Timothy 2:9 the fact that it is translated in 1 Tim. 3:2 as "good behavior" and applied to men seems to support the idea that it's not talking about "sexy clothing" but rather an attitude of being sober and acting in a manner that is appropriate to the occasion.
It is appropriate for a man to get angry and even violent when defending his family from an attack. It is not appropriate to get angry and violent while sitting at the supper table and eating a meal. (unless that happens to be when the attack happens)
I know what Churchianity claims that it means the trouble is I don't see that idea actually supported by scripture.
Just to be clear I am not advocating for women to walk around the grocery store in lingerie. I am advocating for men to step up and take charge and set the standards for their household. Whatever level of "sexy" a man permits or even requires for his women is what she should go by. We shouldn't be attempting to pluck a verse out of context and make it say something it doesn't say.
This false line of reasoning about modesty is used in conjunction with the false teaching about lust to emasculate men and make them feel dirty for their natural God given desires to look at the opposite sex. It is wrong and we should be standing against it, not trying to cherry pick verses and twist their meaning to support it.
Mega dittos
Just want to say thank you to everyone who contributed to this thread. All the replies helped my husband and I so much as we study and try to come to understand what it means for us. Thank you!!
One point that I like to make is that if a woman is looking for a husband I can understand a bit of judicious advertising.
Once you have found him, for what reason would you continue to advertise? Wanting other men to still be attracted to you sexually is perverted. But alas, that is what this world sells.
Once you have found him, for what reason would you continue to advertise? Wanting other men to still be attracted to you sexually is perverted. But alas, that is what this world sells.
My family attended a wedding yesterday, the dress standards of those attending did vary. All where tidy but some younger girls where a little border line in my opinion. My 15 year old daughter (looks 18 but acts 20) was stunning .
My rules are if you dress trashie you will attract rubbish.
At dinner last night with friends the talk was around how she could afford to be very very picky and there is no need to accept any substandard offers or opportunity.
Yes I believe the way we all dress is an advertisement in all things.( social outings, work, etc) The question is what is the market we are pitching to?
Know your product (who you are ) and your price (your true worth)
There is no need to discount quality, it sells itself at full price.
Thank you
Yes I’m a little off topic but my thinking is that in a round about way modesty is universal.
Married or looking
Although when Married woman are advertising it should be about preventing buyers remorse not attracting any new customers.
Although I don’t like the word “advertising “ in the married context.
Perhaps “ marketing” is better
I would say the biggest difference in the perception of whether a married woman is "advertising" or "marketing" is going to be in her attitude and how she interacts with other men. If she is gracious and acts in an appropriate manner she is just affirming to everyone that her hubby has a good wife. If on the other hand she acts flirtatious or like she wants the attention of other men she sends a message that she is not satisfied with her man.
In my experience (and listening to my hubby confirms it) it is more a woman's attitude and manner then dress, hair or makeup that makes the difference.
That said....I don't think mini skirts and gobs of makeup and jewelry reflect well or give any impression of modesty.
I'm a little late to the party, but I think this is the key question:
I see this as key because it is the attitude that you see on a woman's face. It is the opposite of the attitude promoted by feminism. Most women in the world today have harsh faces, but a Godly woman has a soft demeanour that just shines out of her eyes. She is not self-promoting, but is naturally submissive and reverent - first to God, secondly to her father or husband.
This I see as the key to the entire passage. It's not fundamentally about clothing - clothing is a symptom. It is about a fundamental attitude that women are to have. An attitude that is not arrogant, but loving and respectful. When a woman has this attitude, she has shamefacedness / reverence and sobriety / self-control.
And then this fundamental attitude causes her to make sensible decisions in the clothing and hair departments. These decisions are compatible with the foundational attitude, and do not contradict it. But there are not firm rules on skirt length or whatever, because it's not about clothing per-se. A woman can be dressed top-to-toe, but if her face is arrogant the clothing is meaningless. While a topless woman in an African village, who is however unwilling to make eye contact with a man due to traditional modesty, is acting far more modestly than the first woman. That is not to discount clothing, as the woman with that attitude will choose to wear whatever in her culture will emphasise or at least be compatibile with modesty. But clothing is the symptom, not the fundamental issue.
And the more a woman's face shows this attitude, the more beautiful she looks.
Shamefacedness is G127: αἰδώς. Only appears twice in scripture, the other being translated "reverence":
From lexicons, there is a hint of "downcast eyes" in the root words. Bashfulness, modesty, reverence.Hebrews 12:28 said:
I see this as key because it is the attitude that you see on a woman's face. It is the opposite of the attitude promoted by feminism. Most women in the world today have harsh faces, but a Godly woman has a soft demeanour that just shines out of her eyes. She is not self-promoting, but is naturally submissive and reverent - first to God, secondly to her father or husband.
This I see as the key to the entire passage. It's not fundamentally about clothing - clothing is a symptom. It is about a fundamental attitude that women are to have. An attitude that is not arrogant, but loving and respectful. When a woman has this attitude, she has shamefacedness / reverence and sobriety / self-control.
And then this fundamental attitude causes her to make sensible decisions in the clothing and hair departments. These decisions are compatible with the foundational attitude, and do not contradict it. But there are not firm rules on skirt length or whatever, because it's not about clothing per-se. A woman can be dressed top-to-toe, but if her face is arrogant the clothing is meaningless. While a topless woman in an African village, who is however unwilling to make eye contact with a man due to traditional modesty, is acting far more modestly than the first woman. That is not to discount clothing, as the woman with that attitude will choose to wear whatever in her culture will emphasise or at least be compatibile with modesty. But clothing is the symptom, not the fundamental issue.
And the more a woman's face shows this attitude, the more beautiful she looks.
@Mrs.Starr, I think you'd really enjoy this book :
https://www.amazon.com/Return-Modes...d=1579968911&sprefix=a+return+to+modes&sr=8-1
Very helpful.
Thank you, will check it out . And I'm watching the video as I type...
Updated to say: I subscribed to your channel and find your videos very helpful.
Last edited: