Godliness or Worldliness: Clothing
GODLINESS OR WORLDLINESS:
Which Does Our Clothing Show?
Introduction:
There is a clear need for the study of this subject. This is not a sermon which would be accepted by most in the religious world. In fact, this lesson would not be accepted among many brethren. There is no doubt that some in this audience do not agree with some of the principles to be set forth in this sermon. In the past, I also rejected some of the principles I will preach today, but I became convinced that they are according to truth and made the necessary changes in my life and teaching. My hope and prayer is that this sermon will begin a discussion about this issue which will culminate in a unity of teaching and practice based upon principles of truth. As with any other Bible subject, if I am in error, you would be my friend by pointing out that error. I only ask that you give this sermon a fair and open hearing, then base your faith and practice upon the principles of truth. May God bless us all in our study to that end.
Some would suggest that the subject of how much of the body must be covered by our clothing is ultimately settled in the mind of each individual because God has given no absolute truth regarding such in His word. Others, of whom I am one, would suggest that God has given clear standards for that which proper clothing is to cover. It cannot be both ways, for these views are mutually exclusive. If proper clothing is ultimately a matter of opinion, then no one has the right to bind any absolute standard on another. Each must be permitted to be “fully assured in his own mind” without interference from others (see Romans 14). If it is a matter of opinion, we must cease any disputation about the subject regardless of the clothing or lack of clothing under consideration. If proper clothing is ultimately a matter of revealed truth, then the one who rejects that standard is guilty of sin and must repent of such to be in fellowship with God and faithful brethren (2 John 9-11). Serious consequences exist for teaching and practice which stray from God’s will in either case.
I. Principles And Attitudes Fundamental To This Study
A. 1 Timothy 2:9-10
1. Modest–“orderly, well-arranged, decent” (Vine, III:79).
(a) “The well ordering is not of dress and demeanor only, but of the inner life; uttering indeed and expressing itself in the outward conversation” (Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, 323).
(b) “It describes one who disciplines himself and who may thus be regarded as genuinely moral and respectable…. ‘self-controlled,’ ‘disciplined,’ ‘well-mannered,’ ‘honorable'” (Kittel, III:895-96).
2. Shamefacedness–“a sense of shame, modesty, is used regarding the demeanor of women in the church, 1 Tim. 2:9…. ‘Shamefastness is that modesty which is “fast” or rooted in the character'” (Vine, IV:17).
(a) “The shame , or sense of honor, which hinders one from doing an unworthy act….in it is involved an innate moral repugnance to the doing of the dishonorable act….implies reverence for the good as good [and not fear for reputation alone]….that ‘shamefastness’…which shrinks from overpassing the limits of womanly reserve and modesty, as well as from the dishonor which would justly attach thereto” (Trench, 63-68).
(b) Thayer comments on this word by saying it “precedes and prevents the shameful act” and that it “would always restrain a good man from an unworthy act” (Thayer, 14).
3. Sobriety–“soundness of mind…. ‘sound judgment’ practically expresses the meaning” (Vine, IV:44); “self-control” (Thayer, 613).
(a) “An entire command over the passions and desires, so that they receive no further allowance than that which the law and right reason admit and approve….This condition of self-command is taken up and transformed into a condition yet higher still, in which a man does not order and command himself…but…is ordered and commanded by God….that habitual inner self-government, with its constant rein on all the passions and desires, which would hinder the temptation” to overstep “the limits of womanly reserve and modesty” (Trench, 66-68).
(b) W.E. Vine makes these comments (Expository Dict. of N.T. Words, vol. 4, p. 44-45): “It is that habitual inner self-government, with its constant rein on all the passions and desires, which would hinder the temptation to these from arising, or at all events from arising in such strength as would overbear the checks and barriers which `shamefastness’ opposed to it.” “Sobriety” would keep one from wearing that which is designed to be the “sexy,” “revealing,” “eye-catching,” “hot,” and “provocative” styles currently in fashion. It would see such as the “attire of a harlot” (Proverbs 7:10). It is a needed characteristic today!
4. Godliness–“the fear or reverence of God” (Vine, II:162).
5. Dress reflects godly spirit, no carnal display of flesh by overdressing or underdressing.
B. 1 Peter 3:1-6
1. Chaste–“pure from every fault,….pure from carnality, modest” (Vine, Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, I:183; see also Thayer, 8).
(a) Bauer comments as follows: “pure, holy… originally an attribute of the divinity and everything belonging to it… then transferred to moral sense” (Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, trans. by Arndt & Gingrich, 11).
(b) Note use with respect to people (2 Cor. 7:11; 11:2) and things (Phil. 4:8).
2. Fear–respect God’s authority in all things, thus respect husband.
3. Meek–gentle spirit accepting God’s will without resentment or dispute, thus able to endure insult and injury by others; moral strength under control.
4. Quiet–inner peace with God, thus causing no danger or disturbance for others; not forward or bold.
5. Holy–separated from sin, consecrated to God.
6. “Not afraid” to do what is right at all costs.
7. Appeal is made here for Christian women to look at faithful women’s example of old: “For after this manner aforetime the holy women also, who hoped in God, adorned themselves….”
(a) Not a reference to Mosaic law, but Sarah even preceded that law.
(b) When these women of old had the proper attitudes, the proper “behavior” went with such – including their behavior in dress. That is the point emphasized in the context.
(c) “The rule for the holy women of the New Testament time extending down to our day is not different from what was the rule for the holy women of the Old Testament time, resting as it does on a Divine appointment in the earthly constitution” (Pulpit Commentary: 1 Peter, 163).
C. Testimony From Contemporary History To Help Understand Contexts
1. The following is an extended quote from Robert Collen’s book, East to Cathay: The Silk Road (pages 44-46), dealing with the introduction of silk clothing into the first century Roman kingdom: “Silk in its natural state clung to the female form in a way that was infinitely more pleasing to the eye than Parthian banners. But Roman ladies did not stop at that. For one thing, there was not enough pure silk to go around at first. And, anyway, it was not sexy enough for those freewheeling days. So, they unraveled the close-woven Chinese fabric and rewove it into a flimsy gauze which left little to the imagination. So unlike Chinese silk was this Roman adaptation that the Chinese, when they eventually saw it, named it `ling,’ assuming that Rome was growing a special product of its own. For the average Roman girl-watcher those were golden years, but the moralists raised a fearful outcry. `I see clothes of silk, if clothes they can be called,’ wrote the philosopher Seneca (4 B.C. – A.D. 64), `affording protection neither to the body nor to the modesty of the wearer, and which are purchased for enormous sums, from unknown people.’ Pliny told of garments that `render women naked.’ Other writers waggishly referred to clothes `made of glass.'” Thus, the expensive clothes of New Testament times were the revealing clothes that lacked modesty. It was not a prejudice against wealthy people and the luxuries they could afford which caused the Bible writers to condemn “costly raiment.” The indecency as well as the extravagence associated with such clothing caused it to be condemned.
2. Late in the first century, Clement of Alexandria spoke of the same silk fashions as “fabrics foolishly thin, and of curious texture in weaving.” He went on to speak of such as follows (The Instructor, II, xi): “For these superfluous and diaphanous [transparent – HRO] materials are proof of a weak mind, covering as they do the shame of the body with a slender veil. For luxurious clothing, which cannot conceal the shape of the body, is no more a covering. For such clothing, falling close to the body, takes its form more easily, and adhering as it were to the flesh, receives its shape, and marks out the woman’s figure, so that the whole body is visible…” Clement goes on to say that such clothing was associated with “vice” and not with “modesty.”
3. The second century Tertullian described such as “garments which, light and thin, were to be heavy in price alone.” He referred to them as “prostitutionary garbs” appealing to “the provocative charms of apparel.” Tertullian also noted that such clothing was the polar opposite of “modesty” (On The Apparel Of Women, II, ix and x).
(a) Tertullian says much the same throughout books one and two on this subject.
(b) See Prov. 7:10 where the wise writer speaks of the “attire of a harlot.”
4. Thus, we can understand why the apostles opposed clothing which was the “costly raiment” or “fine apparel” of the New Testament time. A great number of historical sources clearly and unanimously tell us about the fashions of the day.
D. Principles Regarding Christian’s Influence Through Actions
1. 1 Thess. 5:21-22 – “prove all things”
2. Col. 3:17 – “do all in the name [by authority] of the Lord”
3. 1 Cor. 10:31 – “do all to the glory of God”
4. 1 Pet. 2:11-15 – work to glorify God
5. Lk. 17:1-2 – not to be a stumblingblock
6. 1 Cor. 10:32 – no offense, but profit
7. 1 Pet. 3:15f – live beyond reproach
8. Matt. 5:13-16 – “let your light so shine that men may see your good works and glorify your Father who is in heaven”
9. Eph. 5:11 – “have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather even reprove them”
II. Bible Teaching Which Specifies Truths Regarding Proper Dress
A. The First Clothing: Man VS God
1. When sin came, nakedness passed from state of innocence to one of shame and danger (Gen. 2:25; 3:7, 10-11).
2. Fig leaves used to make APRONS (3:7).
(a) Hebrew: HAGORA-“girdle, belt,…loinclothes,…aprons” (Harris, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, 1:263; cf. Gesenius, Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon, 260; Brown, Driver, Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 292).
(b) Greek (LXX): PERIDZOMA is compound of “around” plus “life” (euphemism for the area whence comes life). Use of the word in Jer. 13:1-4 makes clear what it covered.
(c) Garment covering loins; from abdomen down, pubic region and hips; anything from midriff or waist and often covering hips (like a woman’s girdle, traditional athletic shorts, a miniskirt, etc.).
(d) Completely “naked” or nude before apron (v. 7), relatively “naked” with apron (v. 10).
3. Animal skin used to make adequate clothing or COATS (3:21).
(a) Hebrew: KUTTONET–“a tunic…; generally with sleeves, coming down to the knees, rarely to the ankles” (Gesenius, 420; cf. Harris, 1:459; Brown, Driver, Briggs, 509).
(b) Greek (LXX): CHITON is the corresponding word which refers to the same garment.
(c) Garment covering from shoulders at least to knees, sometimes longer. This word used in Gen. 37:3 regarding Joseph’s coat of many colors with this note in the margin of the ASV: “a long garment with sleeves.” Also may have a “collar” (Job 30:18).
(1) Josephus says the high priest’s chiton was a “tunic descending to the ankles, enveloping the body and with long sleeves…” (Antiquities, III, vii, 2).
(2) Original I.S.B.E. article on “Dress” says chiton “resembled the Roman tunic, corresponding most nearly to our long shirt, reaching below the knee always, and, in case it was designed for dress occasions, reaching almost to the ground” (I.S.B.E., II:877). Later in the article, it is noted that the chiton of the peasantry was shorter like modern kamis of Syrian fellah which is to the knee.
(3) Wright says, “The tunic (inappropriately translated ‘coat’) was a shirt which was worn next to the skin. It was made of leather, hair-cloth, wool, linen, or in modern times, usually of cotton. The simplest form of it was without sleeves and reached to the knees or sometimes to the ankles. The well-to-do wore it with sleeves and extending to the ankles. Women as well as men wore it [see Cant. 5:3, A.R.V.], although there was no doubt a difference in style and pattern in what was worn by the two” (Fred H. Wight, Manners and Customs of Bible Lands, 91).
(d) Adam went from strictly naked, to partially naked, to properly clothed with the tunic.
4. First clothing from man inadequate because not fully cover nakedness (3:10) ; first clothing from God adequate (longer lasting material secondary–God not make aprons of skins).
5. Remember: Principles of godly demeanor and dress same from then till now (1 Pet. 3:5).
(a) “For after this manner”–New Testament on demeanor and dress.
(b) “…in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands”–Old Testament on demeanor and dress, beginning in Genesis.
6. Shorts and other articles of dress exposing the thighs to the opposite sex:
(a) Like aprons God exchanged for proper clothing.
(b) Fall short of the principles of demeanor and dress recognized by holy women in all ages.
B. Two Kinds of Nakedness: Complete and Partial
1. Naked in strict sense (nude), or partial nakedness (not adequately or fully clothed), as determined by context.
(a) Hebrew: ERYA–“nakedness” (Harris, 1:695).
(b) Greek: GUMNOS
(1) “Unclad, without clothing” (Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon, 122); “unclothed” (Kittel, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 1:773); “naked” (Liddell and Scott, Greek-English Lexicon, 170).
(2) “Ill-clad” or “clad in the undergarment only” (Thayer, 122); “badly clothed” or “not fully clothed” (Kittel, 1:773-74); “in common language…lightly clad” (Liddell and Scott, 170).
2. Strict sense:
(a) Gen. 2:25 “They were both naked, the man and his wife.”
(b) Gen. 3:7 “They knew that they were naked.”
(c) Gen. 9:21-23 Noah “was uncovered” and Ham “saw the nakedness of his father.”
(d) Job. 1:21 “Naked came I out of my mother’s womb.”
(e) Mk. 14:51-52 “Having a linen cloth cast about his naked body” (night clothes).
(f) Lk. 8:27, 35 “A certain man…wore no clothes;” “clothed, and in his right mind.”
3. Not adequately or fully clothed:
(a) As a laborer, poor man, victim of crime, etc. (no moral shame):
(1) 2 Sam. 6:14, 20 David laid aside royal robes and danced before the Lord in “a linen ephod” (attire of humble Levite), thus “uncovered” as a man of no honor.
(2) Isa. 20:2-3 Isaiah was to lay aside his “sackcloth” garment and prophesy “naked.” “A person was looked upon as stripped and naked if he had only taken off his upper [outer] garment” (Keil and Delitzsch, Isaiah, 372). The poor laborer worked in such attire (Ex. 22:26-27).
(3) Matt. 25:36 “I was…naked, and ye clothed me.”
(4) Jn. 21:7 Peter worked “naked,” without his “coat” or outer garment.
(5) Acts 19:16 “They fled out of that house naked.”
(6) Acts 22:23 “They cried out, and cast off their clothes.”
(7) Jas. 2:15 “If a brother or sister be naked….”
(b) Exposing oneself to moral shame:
(1) Gen. 3:10 Adam hid from God “because I was naked” (wore apron).
(2) Ex. 20:26 No steps could be used on altars built to God, “that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon” (i.e., thighs; see 28:42).
(3) Ex. 28:42 Priests wore “linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach” (waist to knees).
(4) Isa. 47:2-3 “Make bare the leg, uncover the thigh….Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen.”
4. Nakedness as a moral shame found from Genesis (3:7) through Revelation (3:17; 16:15; 17:16). Must be covered:
(a) Not cultural or custom, but ordained by God from the beginning (Gen. 3:10-11, 21).
(b) Standard recognized by holy women in all ages (1 Pet. 3:5).
C. Why Most Passages On Dress Directed To Women?
1. However, Adam recognized his nakedness was shameful despite partial clothing (Gen. 3:10). Hence, absolute standard would apply to both equally.
2. Added problem found in fact that woman’s dress greater danger to man than vice versa.
(a) Survey on why men and women go to beach: 69% men to see women in swim suits, 7% women to see men (“Beach Motives,” Psychology Today, Dec. 1982, p. 10).
(b) “Should a business or professional woman ever wear a skirt above her knees to the office? The biggest mistake women make is that they believe they see the world the way men do–but they see the world differently. We did a study with women wearing conservative suits with skirts above the knees. Women would comment that the women were attractive and could be very capable, very talented. Men, on the other hand, said they saw legs,” which was “sexy” (John Mollory, author of books and column on dress, “Issues and Answers,” Houston [TX] Chronicle, 19 Aug. 1993, p. 4F).
2. Must apply Bible principles on dress to men too.
(a) Adam: nude, partially clothed, properly clothed.
(b) Danger of temptation for some women.
(c) Danger with spread of homosexuality.
(d) If not apply, wrong example for women, double standard. “Why are women’s bared breasts ‘obscene’?…Why do men have the freedom of undress when it is hot, when women don’t?” (Pamphlet protests Brattleboro, VT obscenity law, “National and World News,” The Commercial Appeal [Memphis, TN], 30 July 1991). A New York state Court of Appeals ruled in 1992 “that women should have the right, like men, to bare their breasts in public” (“Women don’t have to wear tops to ride subway,” Houston [TX] Chronicle, 1 Sept. 1994, p. 13A).
III. Efforts To Make Issue Just Matter Of Opinion Or Unknowable Area
A. Consider Culture and Custom
1. Nakedness covered by God, principle not subject to change (Gen. 3:7, 10-11, 21; 1 Pet. 3:5).
2. 1 Cor. 9:19-22 Adjust to styles and fashions, but not beyond the limit of God’s Word.
3. Woman’s head veiled in Corinth, but not in Asia Minor (1 Cor. 11:2-16; head uncovered, hair visible in 1 Tim. 1:3; 2:9 and 1 Pet. 1:1; 3:3). Nakedness of Gen. 3:7, 10 tolerated nowhere (cf. Rev. 16:15).
B. How Short Is Too Short?
1. How long or short for hair? Styles change but closer to line of male-female distinction, closer to sin (1 Cor. 11:14-15). Leave no doubt!
2. Keep clear distinction between garments made by man and God: apron, girdle, loin-covering VS cover from shoulders at least to knees.
3. “How short can I go?” Dangerous game.
(a) How short down from shoulder, up from knees, or both?
(b) How far short of nudity–how decide?
(c) Why stop short of nudity if no absolute standard, but just opinion? May we join nudist colony? Bride wore only a veil, groom only a bow tie, and minister only glasses for wedding at Natural Horizons, Inc. near Boling, TX (“Browsing on the Brazos,” Brazoria County [TX] News, 23 Sept. 1993, pp. 1, 18). Why not? How would you oppose such?
C. Popularity Ex. 23:2; Josh. 24:15; Matt. 7:13-14
D. Comfort, Convenience Lk. 9:23
1. At risk of compromising God’s Word?
2. At risk of losing your soul?
3. At risk of misleading others?
F. “I Don’t Care What Anyone Says, I Like My Shorts Even if They Expose My Thighs.” Jn. 12:48; Matt. 26:39
G. Compromise for Sports
1. Compromise forbidden. Isa. 52:11
2. Modesty compromised by some Jews in intertestamental times:
(a) Some said, “Let us go and make a covenant with the heathen that are round about us: for since we departed from them we have had much sorrow….They built a place of exercise at Jerusalem according to the customs of the heathen” in 175 B.C. (1 Maccabees 1:11,14).
(b) Greek: GUMNASION (from gumnos, naked) “the public place where athletic exercises were practised, the gymnastic school” (Liddell and Scott, 170). Greek athletes exercised and performed nude.
(c) While many orthodox Jews shunned the gym and its nudity, other youths joined in with a loincloth and some stripped naked (I.S.B.E., IV:2112 and Moore, Judaism, I:49). Some “made themselves uncircumcised” to please the Gentiles, and some priests neglected the altar and “hastened to…the place of exercise” (1 Macc. 1:15; 2 Macc. 4:14).
3. Meet challenge with courage and conviction, insist on proper clothes, not surrender by compromise. Rev. 18:4
H. Seek Safest Course, Set Best Example
1. Sober mind of modest dress for all Christians, and must teach children (1 Tim. 2:9, 15; Tit. 2:2-7, 12). Requires highest standards of sound judgment, self-control, habitual inner self-government in dress.
2. Must be clearly modest at all times standing or sitting.
3. Bad signs: conscience troubled, tug at garment, use something extra to cover legs when sit (newspaper, magazine, coat, cushion, etc.).
IV. Where Does It All Lead?
A. Shorter and Shorter Shorts, Skirts & Tops (1 Tim. 4:2)
1. Conscience seared and hardened, expose more and more nakedness.
B. More Tolerant of Other Forms of Worldliness (2 Tim. 3:13)
1. Mixed swimming accepted.
2. Approve abbreviated attire of majorette, cheerleader, drill team, etc.
3. Examples of how one compromise leads to another:
(a) To oppose shorts, dancing, mixed swimming, and social drinking is “trivial,” “legalism,” and “petty” (liberal Rubel Shelly, “Why Were They Ever `Issues’?” Love Lines [publ. by Woodmont Hills Church of Christ, Nashville, TN], 18 Sept. 1991).
(b) Liberal church commends teenager for being “a cheerleader,….on the gymnastics team,….on the track team” (“Shelli Honored…,” The Family of God [publ. by Garnett Church of Christ, Tulsa, OK], 28 Oct. 1981).
(c) Preacher going into apostasy said no sin in shorts, mixed swimming, dancing, drinking, and gambling (Dusty Owens, “Answering the Mail,” The Examiner [Charles Holt, ed.], Sept. 1987, p. 12).
(d) Where these views are accepted, shorts are being worn into the worship assembly. Such has even taken place where this preacher has held meetings in the West.
C. Create Sexual Temptations (Rom. 13:13; 1 Pet. 4:1-4; Gal. 5:19)
1. Nakedness associated with sexual impulses and desires–so much so, to “see” or “uncover” nakedness is euphemism for sexual intercourse (Lev. 20:17).
2. Immodest dress lascivious–“absence of restraint, indecency….shameless conduct” (Vine, II:310)–associated with sexual immorality (Gal. 5:19; Rom. 13:13; 1 Pet. 4:1-6).
3. David tempted when “saw a woman washing herself” (2 Sam. 11:2). Note: Bathsheba was at home, but visible. She bears part of blame for carelessly exposing herself and accepting the king’s offer (ie. she was flattered by such, rather than shamed and repulsed).
4. Remember the survey on “Why People Go To The Beach,” survey from Psychology Today, Dec. 82, p. 10. They asked people, “What is your primary reason for going to the beach?”
(a) Of the men, 69% said “to watch the opposite sex.” Of the women, 7% answered same.
(b) Of the women, 40% said it was “to be seen.” Of the men, 10% answered the same.
(c) Of the women, 43% said it was “to sun” and 7% of men answered the same.
(d) That which was being shown, watched, and sunned is very obvious given the attire typical of the beach.
(e) The world is honest when they are asked about such desires because they have nothing to hide. Why do brothers and sisters in Christ try to whitewash their desires? They do not fool the world! Even if their motives were pure, they must see that they are aiding others in sin and ruining their influence for good.
5. On magazine covers and television shows about the latest fashions in swim wear, the leads are all similar. They speak of “sexy,” “revealing,” “eye-catching,” “hot,” and “provocative” styles. A recent survey showed that the average span of fabric between the armhole and leg hole on a one-piece bathing suit is between four and six inches. It is clear they were not designed for conforming to biblical standards for proper clothing. Can anyone honestly call such “modest” by Bible standards?
6. In some cases, the world’s standards even define “proper clothing” in a way more in keeping with Bible principles than do some Christians. The following is from a flyer entitled “Dress Standards For Visitors” which is distributed to the visitors for the Twin Rivers Correctional Center, a prison in Monroe, Washington:
CLOTHING NOT ALLOWED:
☞ Low-cut (exposing undergarments, cleavage, back)
☞ Sheer, transparent or mesh fabrics (other than hosiery)
☞ Tight fitting clothing (spandex, lycra or other rubberized or elasticized)
☞ Clothing that refers to obscenity, alcohol, drugs or sex in any form
☞ Shorts, cut-offs, halter tops, sleeveless blouses or shirts
E. Resist and Resent Plain Bible Preaching (2 Tim. 4:3-4)
1. Claim, “We cannot really know what modesty is–gray area.”
2. Proclaim, “No one’s business how I dress.”
3. Complain to others (too strict, traditional, bind opinions, out of touch with young, etc.).
4. Campaign to “change preachers if he doesn’t hush about it.” I even had a list of forbidden subjects at previous congregation – and “Modesty” was one of the subjects listed.
5. Decide to “worship elsewhere where we can be more needed and appreciated.”
F. Soften Hearts for Next Apostasy (2 Tim. 4:3-4)
1. “Accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative” in pulpit (move subject of modesty to classroom, where it will be called “gray area”).
2. “Should not offend anyone.”
3. “Just preach love and issues go away.”
4. “Preach Christ not baptism, one true church, obedience, Bible pattern, modesty, etc.”
Conclusion:
1. If a Christian, resolve to reflect godliness not worldliness in dress (Matt. 5:16)
2. If stumble and err, confess to God and correct sin (1 Jn. 1:9)
3. If not a Christian, obey gospel without delay and grow in Christ (Acts 22:16)
To see good Bible study material, go to: