Jack, sadly once again, another of your "good vs. better" argument has been torpedoed by the "what abouts" and their handy list of exceptions. This is why we can't have genuine humble and helpful debate anymore. Just a bunch of petulant children dead set on having their way and stiff-arming any attempt at healthy rebuke. Don't bother to stop for a second and maybe consider you could possibly have some room to do better. Just congratulate yourself on finding the loopholes that allow you to keep doing what you want anyway. Oh, and men: you're terrible, it's 100% your problem, and women have no obligation whatsoever to help you in your faith. Nice.
The "damaging effects of purity culture" are so overblown, and almost always cover for sexual license.
The cultures you've mentioned are largely unchristianized cultures, with a very different sexual ethic altogether. The more Christianized a culture becomes, the more people cover their bodies. That is not a coincidence.
Notice in Genesis that Adam and Eve made themselves loin coverings.
They're the only two people on earth, and they clothed themselves like modern beachgoers. And God came in and gave them "tunics," per BDB lexicon. Why? According to you, they were already sufficiently clothed.
As a woman, I didn't always dress modestly in the past, but it's very important to me now, honoring God with my body.
The tradition of "wearing a dress to church assembly" (tradition, not Scriptural command) has a loophole, because honestly I have worn immodest dresses and justified it because it's "a dress", and I think other women do too, same with wedding dresses and formal dresses, as you point out.
You say modesty isn’t situational (as if it’s scriptural???) and yet expect women to feel totally fine being naked in bed on the wedding night??? Purity culture is SUCH a mind game!!!
I can’t tell women not to go to the pool in their underwear or guys to go to the gym without it meaning that people won’t be comfortable to disrobe on their Honeymoon? Come on.
Doctors and nurses do what has to be done. It is not a choice. We are talking about choices.
As to different people groups, re-read the portion of the article that talks about following conventions, and then asks whether the convention for Christians should be drawn from a non-Christian, hyper-sexualized society. Your "point" was already addressed.
Jack, sadly once again, another of your "good vs. better" argument has been torpedoed by the "what abouts" and their handy list of exceptions. This is why we can't have genuine humble and helpful debate anymore. Just a bunch of petulant children dead set on having their way and stiff-arming any attempt at healthy rebuke. Don't bother to stop for a second and maybe consider you could possibly have some room to do better. Just congratulate yourself on finding the loopholes that allow you to keep doing what you want anyway. Oh, and men: you're terrible, it's 100% your problem, and women have no obligation whatsoever to help you in your faith. Nice.
Exactly. And that’s why I love the word “licentiousness” as applied to this situation. It’s exactly what they’re practicing.
You brought up surgery patients as defense for people who want to flaunt their bodies in public. You're not seriously engaging.
The "damaging effects of purity culture" are so overblown, and almost always cover for sexual license.
The cultures you've mentioned are largely unchristianized cultures, with a very different sexual ethic altogether. The more Christianized a culture becomes, the more people cover their bodies. That is not a coincidence.
Notice in Genesis that Adam and Eve made themselves loin coverings.
They're the only two people on earth, and they clothed themselves like modern beachgoers. And God came in and gave them "tunics," per BDB lexicon. Why? According to you, they were already sufficiently clothed.
In Bible days everyone had tunics to their knees-men n women had dresses to their wrists n ankles lol
There's no excuse to run around half naked christian or not
totally agree!!!!
As a woman, I didn't always dress modestly in the past, but it's very important to me now, honoring God with my body.
The tradition of "wearing a dress to church assembly" (tradition, not Scriptural command) has a loophole, because honestly I have worn immodest dresses and justified it because it's "a dress", and I think other women do too, same with wedding dresses and formal dresses, as you point out.
Well said. Without a dedication to it out of the right heart, just about anything can be made immodest.
Rebellion and inability to blush (Jer. 6:15).
You say modesty isn’t situational (as if it’s scriptural???) and yet expect women to feel totally fine being naked in bed on the wedding night??? Purity culture is SUCH a mind game!!!
I agree with saratogasummer. The title alone 🤦♀️
lol, ok.
I can’t tell women not to go to the pool in their underwear or guys to go to the gym without it meaning that people won’t be comfortable to disrobe on their Honeymoon? Come on.
“Answer a fool as his folly deserves…”
Drawing on surgeons proves how ridiculous your position is
Doctors and nurses do what has to be done. It is not a choice. We are talking about choices.
As to different people groups, re-read the portion of the article that talks about following conventions, and then asks whether the convention for Christians should be drawn from a non-Christian, hyper-sexualized society. Your "point" was already addressed.
Why do you think the bikini was invented? Comfort???
It's not "my distorted view of the human body." The precedent for covering the shame of nakedness is on page 3 of the Bible.