HOME | DD

Description
body div#devskin0 hr { }

1 Timothy 2:9-10

also that the women should dress themselves modestly and decently in suitable clothing, not with their hair braided, or with gold, pearls, or expensive clothes, but with good works, as is proper for women who profess reverence for God.

Two actions - dressing in worldly vain and dressing in God's goodness - are being compared, making this a literary device (in this case, a metaphor) to decipher.

This verse is instructing women to not dress in the world's glory and treasures, but in the humility of God. Dressing up your personality and manner in worldly garments (in this case, ungodly acts are symbolized with jewelry and nice clothes) does not reflect a Christian lifestyle of good works and worship (good works being used to describe the clothing a woman should dress her manners with).

If this passage were taken literally, then other passages of Scripture would contradict it! Jews and early Christians often revered godly wisdom, personifying it as a woman; the lady Wisdom would be said to be adorned with pearls, silver, and gold, perfumed with myrrh and other expensive scents (you can read these descriptions in Song of Songs, Proverbs, Wisdom, etc). If the author literally instructed women to NOT wear fancy clothing, why would they describe Wisdom, and even Mary the Mother of God, wearing rich garments and precious gems? That is because they are not speaking of literal riches in 1 Timothy: they are using a metaphor.

Also, preventing the stumbling of men is not mentioned at all in those verses or surrounding verses. If someone tries to use this passage as a reason to dress modestly to stop men from lusting, they are clearly using it out of context, both in a literal and literary way.

1 Corinthians 8:13

Therefore, if food is a cause of their falling, I will never eat meat, so that I may not cause one of them to fall.

This whole chapter is about the issue of eating food at idolatrous alters, which is why Paul speaks of meat in these verses. As was common in those days, people would sacrifice animals and then eat the meat in honor of the idol; because of this, the "weak-minded" would see meat and be reminded of idolatry, and be distracted from serving God. Paul then advises that to help the weak-willed, they avoid eating meat around them (specifically, meat for idols) in order to get them used to thinking of God, not idols.

However, it does not place blame on the meat eaters; if that is the case, then it would contradict when Jesus spoke of making unclean foods clean, thus no one would become sinful from eating unclean food (Mark 7:18-20). No food causes someone to stumble, only when someone is weak-willed enough to make themselves stumble because of it. Just as meat would have been a weakness for former pagans in Paul's day, sexually attractive clothing (form-fitting or otherwise) is a weakness for men (and women) struggling with lust.

Whether or not you want to stop eating meat to help former pagans - or stop wearing provocative clothing to help lustful men - is a personal choice, and varies on the person and the circumstance they are in. It is NOT, however, a reason to put blame on the person eating the meat or wearing the clothing. As I said, that is a personal choice for an individual to make, and you can not assume every person will take on that challenge, nor are they expected to.

Romans 14:13-14

Let us therefore no longer pass judgment on one another, but resolve instead never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of another. I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean.

Don't intentionally tempt the weak: that's pretty much it. If you know your friend is struggling with porn, don't tempt them by giving them a porno mag. If you know someone who is struggling with greed, don't make them go on a shopping spree with you. If you know your neighbor has problems with lusting after women, then don't intentionally seduce him.

And seducing goes beyond what you are wearing. It's how you act, speak, and interact with others. Clothing can be a part of it, depending on what you know the other person finds attractive. Therefore, dressing "slutty" isn't "tempting" another man, unless you know dressing like a tramp will make a certain guy wolf whistle at you.

A woman tempting another man (regardless of what she is wearing) is the true sinner, not a woman who ran down to the store to grab some milk wearing her shorts and tank top. Even if a woman goes to a party to seduce a guy she knows will give in, she is not asking for unwanted attention or even sexual abuse: she is simply sinning by tempting a guy into sinning with her. She is sinning for knowingly tempting a weaker person, and he is sinning by lusting after a woman he is not married to. They each have their own separate sins to own up to.

Heck, in the Catholic Church, tempting someone with words alone is called adulation, and is considered a grievous fault and sin:

CCC 2480 Every word or attitude is forbidden which by flattery, adulation, or complaisance encourages and confirms another in malicious acts and perverse conduct. Adulation is a grave fault if it makes one an accomplice in another’s vices or grave sins. Neither the desire to be of service nor friendship justifies duplicitous speech. Adulation is a venial sin when it only seeks to be agreeable, to avoid evil, to meet a need, or to obtain legitimate advantages.

Remember kiddies, it's the act, not the clothes.

Description
body div#devskin0 hr { }

1 Timothy 2:9-10

also that the women should dress themselves modestly and decently in suitable clothing, not with their hair braided, or with gold, pearls, or expensive clothes, but with good works, as is proper for women who profess reverence for God.

Two actions - dressing in worldly vain and dressing in God's goodness - are being compared, making this a literary device (in this case, a metaphor) to decipher.

This verse is instructing women to not dress in the world's glory and treasures, but in the humility of God. Dressing up your personality and manner in worldly garments (in this case, ungodly acts are symbolized with jewelry and nice clothes) does not reflect a Christian lifestyle of good works and worship (good works being used to describe the clothing a woman should dress her manners with).

If this passage were taken literally, then other passages of Scripture would contradict it! Jews and early Christians often revered godly wisdom, personifying it as a woman; the lady Wisdom would be said to be adorned with pearls, silver, and gold, perfumed with myrrh and other expensive scents (you can read these descriptions in Song of Songs, Proverbs, Wisdom, etc). If the author literally instructed women to NOT wear fancy clothing, why would they describe Wisdom, and even Mary the Mother of God, wearing rich garments and precious gems? That is because they are not speaking of literal riches in 1 Timothy: they are using a metaphor.

Also, preventing the stumbling of men is not mentioned at all in those verses or surrounding verses. If someone tries to use this passage as a reason to dress modestly to stop men from lusting, they are clearly using it out of context, both in a literal and literary way.

1 Corinthians 8:13

Therefore, if food is a cause of their falling, I will never eat meat, so that I may not cause one of them to fall.

This whole chapter is about the issue of eating food at idolatrous alters, which is why Paul speaks of meat in these verses. As was common in those days, people would sacrifice animals and then eat the meat in honor of the idol; because of this, the "weak-minded" would see meat and be reminded of idolatry, and be distracted from serving God. Paul then advises that to help the weak-willed, they avoid eating meat around them (specifically, meat for idols) in order to get them used to thinking of God, not idols.

However, it does not place blame on the meat eaters; if that is the case, then it would contradict when Jesus spoke of making unclean foods clean, thus no one would become sinful from eating unclean food (Mark 7:18-20). No food causes someone to stumble, only when someone is weak-willed enough to make themselves stumble because of it. Just as meat would have been a weakness for former pagans in Paul's day, sexually attractive clothing (form-fitting or otherwise) is a weakness for men (and women) struggling with lust.

Whether or not you want to stop eating meat to help former pagans - or stop wearing provocative clothing to help lustful men - is a personal choice, and varies on the person and the circumstance they are in. It is NOT, however, a reason to put blame on the person eating the meat or wearing the clothing. As I said, that is a personal choice for an individual to make, and you can not assume every person will take on that challenge, nor are they expected to.

Romans 14:13-14

Let us therefore no longer pass judgment on one another, but resolve instead never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of another. I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean.

Don't intentionally tempt the weak: that's pretty much it. If you know your friend is struggling with porn, don't tempt them by giving them a porno mag. If you know someone who is struggling with greed, don't make them go on a shopping spree with you. If you know your neighbor has problems with lusting after women, then don't intentionally seduce him.

And seducing goes beyond what you are wearing. It's how you act, speak, and interact with others. Clothing can be a part of it, depending on what you know the other person finds attractive. Therefore, dressing "slutty" isn't "tempting" another man, unless you know dressing like a tramp will make a certain guy wolf whistle at you.

A woman tempting another man (regardless of what she is wearing) is the true sinner, not a woman who ran down to the store to grab some milk wearing her shorts and tank top. Even if a woman goes to a party to seduce a guy she knows will give in, she is not asking for unwanted attention or even sexual abuse: she is simply sinning by tempting a guy into sinning with her. She is sinning for knowingly tempting a weaker person, and he is sinning by lusting after a woman he is not married to. They each have their own separate sins to own up to.

Heck, in the Catholic Church, tempting someone with words alone is called adulation, and is considered a grievous fault and sin:

CCC 2480 Every word or attitude is forbidden which by flattery, adulation, or complaisance encourages and confirms another in malicious acts and perverse conduct. Adulation is a grave fault if it makes one an accomplice in another’s vices or grave sins. Neither the desire to be of service nor friendship justifies duplicitous speech. Adulation is a venial sin when it only seeks to be agreeable, to avoid evil, to meet a need, or to obtain legitimate advantages.

Remember kiddies, it's the act, not the clothes.