The Lord’S Intent

[irishman]

As far as I know, there are no "grey area" in the Bible.

 

Gray Areas?

    Often, when we are debating an issue, someone will challenge us with “Chapter and verse please”, but there is not always a chapter and verse for things that are right.  Why don’t they ask the Holy Spirit for chapter and verse?  Let me say first that there are no gray areas, not really; my Bible is written in black and white, and is as plain as black and white.  Nevertheless, here are seven guidelines for us to use to determine what  is right and wrong when there may not seem to be an applicable verse:

Ask yourself “How does this affect me…”
1.    Spiritually?
2.    Mentally? (see James 1:8)
3.    Morally?
4.    Emotionally?
5.    Ethically?
6.    Physically?
7.    and Socially.?

If you are honest, you will get your answer as to whether something is wrong or right, and how important it might be to you.  

This is true with standards that some claim are more preference than scriptural; Many times people say that to skirt the issue, and are most likely under conviction.   You cannot fight the Holy Spirit, nor argue Him away.
 

[John81]

As far as I know, there are no "grey area" in the Bible.

 

Gray Areas?

    Often, when we are debating an issue, someone will challenge us with “Chapter and verse please”, but there is not always a chapter and verse for things that are right.  Why don’t they ask the Holy Spirit for chapter and verse?  Let me say first that there are no gray areas, not really; my Bible is written in black and white, and is as plain as black and white.  Nevertheless, here are seven guidelines for us to use to determine what  is right and wrong when there may not seem to be an applicable verse:

Ask yourself “How does this affect me…”
1.    Spiritually?
2.    Mentally? (see James 1:8)
3.    Morally?
4.    Emotionally?
5.    Ethically?
6.    Physically?
7.    and Socially.?

If you are honest, you will get your answer as to whether something is wrong or right, and how important it might be to you.  

This is true with standards that some claim are more preference than scriptural; Many times people say that to skirt the issue, and are most likely under conviction.   You cannot fight the Holy Spirit, nor argue Him away.
 

What length must a woman's dress be?

 

How long must a woman's hair be? How short must a man's hair be?

 

Paul dealt with some of this in First Corinthians when dealing with the matter of eating meat offered to idols.

 

While I do agree that much of what many folks declare to be gray areas are not actually gray when one gives them a full study in Scripture.

 

That said, there are some matters which are not clearly black and white; just not as many as a lot of folks would have us believe.

[swathdiver]

How about 2 Peter 1:19-20?

 

Better than hearing from God and Jesus with our own ears, Peter tells us to follow the Scriptures.

 

The Lord also tells us not to trust our hearts and feelings; we are to learn and trust his Word

[JerryNumbers]

Many will claim they're following the leading of the Holy Spirit even though what they do contradicts God's written Word within the pages of the Bible.

 

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

 

And its the Bible that is to be used for, reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

 

Some seems to use the leading of the Holy Spirit in order to do as they wish, even walk with the world while enjoying worldly things.

[Donald]

Good evening swathdiver

I will briefly answer your question, before getting back to my responses to Steve.

You asked......
“Donald, are you saying here that one can only really learn and grow through prayer and not the Bible, pastors or preachers?”

Of course not......
Ephesians 4:11-12
V.11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
V.12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
----------------
All of these elements are important and needed(God’s Word, prayer & preachers).
But none of them can be put into a vacuum.  You can’t say, “either believe the Bible or follow the Holy Spirit’s leadership”.
Remember the Holy Spirit is the author of the Bible(He gave God’s Word to the men who pinned it).  Therefore the Holy Spirit can never contradict Bible Doctrine.
But He will contradict man’s doctrine, every time.
And that is what this entire argument boils down to.  “Bible Doctrine" or "man’s doctrine”.

Now some have said, “what’s the harm with man’s doctrine, if it's good and protects us from getting away from the Lord?”
And you and I may not see too much wrong with some good man’s teachings, that help us to stay out of trouble. 

But the Lord sure does see something wrong with it........
Mark 7:7
“Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men.”

According to Jesus, if we are teaching or following even “ONE” doctrine(teaching), that is from the mind of men, OUR WORSHIP BECOMES EMPTY AND WORTHLESS!

See you later.
 

[irishman]

What length must a woman's dress be?

 

How long must a woman's hair be? How short must a man's hair be?

 

Paul dealt with some of this in First Corinthians when dealing with the matter of eating meat offered to idols.

 

While I do agree that much of what many folks declare to be gray areas are not actually gray when one gives them a full study in Scripture.

 

That said, there are some matters which are not clearly black and white; just not as many as a lot of folks would have us believe.

 

Please don't take offense, but it seems that a simple person needs everything in "Black and white".  God has given us scriptural scruples too, and some things are just common sense, like...

How long should a woman's skirt be to keep men's eyes from lusting?

A woman's hair is her covering (a sign of submission), and "long hair on a man is beyond the poll line, where the preists had it cut.  A shaven head was/is a shame to a man, etc.

 

Some of these have scriptural references and are not as "grey" as we like them to be.

 

It just seems to fit under "moderation" and scripture. (modesty is all but gone today)

[John81]

Please don't take offense, but it seems that a simple person needs everything in "Black and white".  God has given us scriptural scruples too, and some things are just common sense, like...

How long should a woman's skirt be to keep men's eyes from lusting?

A woman's hair is her covering (a sign of submission), and "long hair on a man is beyond the poll line, where the preists had it cut.  A shaven head was/is a shame to a man, etc.

 

Some of these have scriptural references and are not as "grey" as we like them to be.

 

It just seems to fit under "moderation" and scripture. (modesty is all but gone today)

These are matters that not even IFB churches are in agreement on.

 

Just how long does a dress have to be in order to be modest and keep men's eyes from lusting? Some would say knee length, some a little below the knee, some ankle length and others would say even longer. This reminds me of the elderly men being interviewed and they talked about in their youth they used to sit near the end of the sidewalks (which were wood back then, around early 1900s, and had steps from the street to the sidewalk) so they could watch the women lift their dresses a bit as they came up the steps. The reason they did this was so they could get a look at the ladies ankles and enjoy the lust.

 

Today we have IFB women who wear their hair very short. Some IFBs say length doesn't matter, only whether the hairstyle is male or female.

 

Some IFBs denounce men with beards while others accept beards. Just as some say very short hair on a man is to his shame, based upon things in ancient Israel, so the Word from that time points out that for a man to not have a beard was his shame as well.

 

My point being, in these areas (and a few others) not even IFBs can find "black and white" but instead a gray area they are unable to come into agreement upon.

[HappyChristian]

Hate to say this, but if a man's gonna lust, the dress length isn't going to matter. If it did, we wouldn't hear stories of old ladies being raped...

 

That said, Irish is right - modesty is all but gone these days.  How long should a woman's dress be?  Well, scripture gives us a clue when we see that what God put on Adam and Even were LONG cloaks (when you look into the Hebrew...I know, I know, some people say you don't need it.  But when it comes to answering questions like this, sometimes it's necessary and useful and educational).  What is long?  Well, further into the OT, we see God talking about a woman being uncovered at the thigh and that it was an act, really, of harlotry.  What is the thigh?  Well, anatomically (and God knew this, since He created us), it is from the hip-bone to the knee.

 

So, how long should a woman's dress be?  To the knee, at least, according to scriptural principle.  Anything longer than that would fit under the head of the home's personal taste/belief/wishes.

 

As to hair, if a man's hair would be cause to mistake him for a woman, it's too long.  And the reverse would be true of a woman.  There are too many androgynous hair styles - those which both men and women wear. Those should be avoided by Christian men and women because of the gender neutrality of them.  The man's hair would be shorter, the woman's longer than that (the gender neutral hairstyles would be at ear length). So, above the ears for men, bottom of the neck or longer for women.  Law?  Nope - principle of gender separation which is found throughout scripture (not the least of which is the hotly debated Deut. 22:5, a verse that clearly teaches gender separation in appearance).

[John81]

Hate to say this, but if a man's gonna lust, the dress length isn't going to matter. If it did, we wouldn't hear stories of old ladies being raped...

 

 

Not really. While it's not such a problem today, when I was younger what a woman wore had a great deal to do with the thoughts that would be in my mind. While I might notice a modestly dressed woman was pretty, that wouldn't lead to lust. If I saw the same woman wearing a low cut top, short dress, or even a knee length dress that highlighted her calves, that would almost have certainly led at the very least to the temptation to lust and probably often actual lust in the heart.

 

From what I've read, most guys who rape old ladies do so mostly out of sins other than lust. The rape is more an expression of their bitter anger, pride and desire to dominate.

 

In any event, what a woman wears does effect whether some men will or won't lust after them or even be tempted to do so.

 

From what I've been told by many women, the same applies in reverse. The way a man dresses has a major impact upon whether a woman lusts after him or not.

 

As with the old man I referred to in another post. In his youth women always wore ground length dresses. For him to get a glimpse of a woman's ankle was enough to elicit lust in him. He also pointed out how much things have changed since then (which you and Irish reference) and how today seeing an ankle is nothing because so many women show nearly their whole body in public.

 

We could probably visit a dozen different IFB churches across the country and come up with a dozen different answers to questions about dress length, necklines, sleeves, etc. The same would probably be true when discussing the issue of women's hair and men's hair and beards. And several other matters would likely receive a dozen different replies too!

 

I know of IFB churches which say men are only allowed to wear white shirts. Some don't allow beards on men. What's accepted as a modest dress in one IFB church is considered immodest and not allowed in another.

 

It's obvious, even just among IFBs there is no agreement that Scripture speaks specifically to these matters which leaves these being gray.

[HappyChristian]

Not really. While it's not such a problem today, when I was younger what a woman wore had a great deal to do with the thoughts that would be in my mind. While I might notice a modestly dressed woman was pretty, that wouldn't lead to lust. If I saw the same woman wearing a low cut top, short dress, or even a knee length dress that highlighted her calves, that would almost have certainly led at the very least to the temptation to lust and probably often actual lust in the heart.  I understand that.  But if a woman has a modest dress on, men can still lust. I'm not saying that women shouldn't be modest. What I'm trying to say is that it isn't always the woman's fault.  Men need to make sure their hearts are right, or they can lust even after a modest woman.  Too many men make the excuse that it's the woman's fault....

 

From what I've read, most guys who rape old ladies do so mostly out of sins other than lust. The rape is more an expression of their bitter anger, pride and desire to dominate. Yes.  And that is all part of lust - lust is not always sexual.  People lust for power as well.

 

In any event, what a woman wears does effect whether some men will or won't lust after them or even be tempted to do so. Yes, it can. But the truth is that some men will lust no matter what a woman wears. A man must guard his heart and not just conveniently blame the woman for his lust.

 

From what I've been told by many women, the same applies in reverse. The way a man dresses has a major impact upon whether a woman lusts after him or not. I think this is true today, but it wasn't in yesteryear. 

 

As with the old man I referred to in another post. In his youth women always wore ground length dresses. For him to get a glimpse of a woman's ankle was enough to elicit lust in him. He also pointed out how much things have changed since then (which you and Irish reference) and how today seeing an ankle is nothing because so many women show nearly their whole body in public.  His lust at the ankle isn't the woman's fault, though. If it were, than any woman who wore anything but a floor length dress, even today, would be in sin.  Again, men need to guard their hearts. Otherwise women should just wear burkas...  

 

We could probably visit a dozen different IFB churches across the country and come up with a dozen different answers to questions about dress length, necklines, sleeves, etc. The same would probably be true when discussing the issue of women's hair and men's hair and beards. And several other matters would likely receive a dozen different replies too!

 

I know of IFB churches which say men are only allowed to wear white shirts. Some don't allow beards on men. What's accepted as a modest dress in one IFB church is considered immodest and not allowed in another.  This is true, and is fine if the reason is based on scripture or scriptural principle.

 

It's obvious, even just among IFBs there is no agreement that Scripture speaks specifically to these matters which leaves these being gray. I think actually it's the application that would be gray, because there is agreement (in those churches that haven't become seeker-sensitive) that modesty is important. It's just how modesty is practiced that is different.  KWIM?

John, I'm honestly not trying to argue, nor even do I really disagree with you. I just think that all too often, the blame for a man's lust is laid on the woman's clothing, without anything said about the man's heart.  I know that men can be tempted.  But let's remember what James says: "But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed."

 

But, lest there be any question, I stand firmly on a woman being modest (and, again, scripture indicates that the thigh is to be covered, hence all a woman's clothing should be knee length or longer    )

[Steve Schwenke]

John, please understand this about grey areas.  There are some.  My contention is that there simply not as many as some would say they are. 

Modesty is not a grey area - how we apply modesty may differ from one church to another. 

The examples you give are the types of "man's doctrine" that I think Donald is trying to get at - color of shirt, beards on men, how "long" is "long hair" for men, how "short" is "short hair" for women, length of dress/skirt, etc. 

 

These are areas each local assembly must decide for themselves.  In the absence of a CLEAR statement or principle from the Bible, we have the liberty in Christ to differ on these types of matters. 

Where we get off track is when we DEMAND compliance from other churches, and withdraw any fellowship with a church that doesn't agree with our interpretation on these types of issues.

 

In my mind, music does not fit into that category.  Maybe Br. Cloud takes things to the extreme, but I think he has the right idea on music.  There are some other issues that I know are not "grey" but are clearly spelled out in Scripture.

 

In Christ,

[John81]

John, I'm honestly not trying to argue, nor even do I really disagree with you. I just think that all too often, the blame for a man's lust is laid on the woman's clothing, without anything said about the man's heart.  I know that men can be tempted.  But let's remember what James says: "But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed."

 

But, lest there be any question, I stand firmly on a woman being modest (and, again, scripture indicates that the thigh is to be covered, hence all a woman's clothing should be knee length or longer    )

We are likely in agreement. While a woman's dress can bring about lust, for some men, no matter how a woman dresses they will lust. The man who lusts, whether after seeing an immodestly dressed woman or not, has a problem he needs to deal with just the same as a woman who is dressed immodestly.

 

I agree, to one extent or another, a dozen IFB churches would agree modesty is important, but as you say, the disagreement comes as to just what that means. While some IFB churches would say their position is Bible and denounce all others as sin, there are some which would say there is a gray area there. I've even heard a few IFB pastors take the position that when it comes to matters of women's dress, hair and such things, they proclaim that whatever their wife chooses is what sets the boundaries. This sort of thing has been common in many non-IFB churches for decades.

 

Anyway, no intention for any of us here to try and set a standard, just pointing some of this out as areas where not only is Christianity in general all over the map, but even among IFBs there is a vast difference in some cases on these matters as to what is and isn't biblical.

[John81]

John, please understand this about grey areas.  There are some.  My contention is that there simply not as many as some would say they are. 

Modesty is not a grey area - how we apply modesty may differ from one church to another. 

The examples you give are the types of "man's doctrine" that I think Donald is trying to get at - color of shirt, beards on men, how "long" is "long hair" for men, how "short" is "short hair" for women, length of dress/skirt, etc. 

 

These are areas each local assembly must decide for themselves.  In the absence of a CLEAR statement or principle from the Bible, we have the liberty in Christ to differ on these types of matters. 

Where we get off track is when we DEMAND compliance from other churches, and withdraw any fellowship with a church that doesn't agree with our interpretation on these types of issues.

 

In my mind, music does not fit into that category.  Maybe Br. Cloud takes things to the extreme, but I think he has the right idea on music.  There are some other issues that I know are not "grey" but are clearly spelled out in Scripture.

 

In Christ,

We've already touched on this and seem to be in agreement here.

[JerryNumbers]

Hate to say this, but if a man's gonna lust, the dress length isn't going to matter. If it did, we wouldn't hear stories of old ladies being raped...

 

That said, Irish is right - modesty is all but gone these days.  How long should a woman's dress be?  Well, scripture gives us a clue when we see that what God put on Adam and Even were LONG cloaks (when you look into the Hebrew...I know, I know, some people say you don't need it.  But when it comes to answering questions like this, sometimes it's necessary and useful and educational).  What is long?  Well, further into the OT, we see God talking about a woman being uncovered at the thigh and that it was an act, really, of harlotry.  What is the thigh?  Well, anatomically (and God knew this, since He created us), it is from the hip-bone to the knee.

 

So, how long should a woman's dress be?  To the knee, at least, according to scriptural principle.  Anything longer than that would fit under the head of the home's personal taste/belief/wishes.

 

As to hair, if a man's hair would be cause to mistake him for a woman, it's too long.  And the reverse would be true of a woman.  There are too many androgynous hair styles - those which both men and women wear. Those should be avoided by Christian men and women because of the gender neutrality of them.  The man's hair would be shorter, the woman's longer than that (the gender neutral hairstyles would be at ear length). So, above the ears for men, bottom of the neck or longer for women.  Law?  Nope - principle of gender separation which is found throughout scripture (not the least of which is the hotly debated Deut. 22:5, a verse that clearly teaches gender separation in appearance).

 

Your wrong, the dress can make a difference, & that is why God tell women to dress modest.

 

1Ti 2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

 

If there's 2 women setting down & one has on a long dress & the other one has on a very short dress that slips way up while setting, that short dress can make thoughts go though that man's mind that would never enter his mind if she had a long dress on at the woman setting next to her.

 

Like the pastor on one Sunday morning that had a young woman setting on the front pew wearing a mini dress, he paused took of his jacket laying it on her lap, them went back to preaching.

 

An immodest dressed woman can bring thought to a man's mind that would never appear in his mind if she was dressed as God tells her to.

[JerryNumbers]

Not really. While it's not such a problem today, when I was younger what a woman wore had a great deal to do with the thoughts that would be in my mind. While I might notice a modestly dressed woman was pretty, that wouldn't lead to lust. If I saw the same woman wearing a low cut top, short dress, or even a knee length dress that highlighted her calves, that would almost have certainly led at the very least to the temptation to lust and probably often actual lust in the heart.

 

From what I've read, most guys who rape old ladies do so mostly out of sins other than lust. The rape is more an expression of their bitter anger, pride and desire to dominate.

 

In any event, what a woman wears does effect whether some men will or won't lust after them or even be tempted to do so.

 

From what I've been told by many women, the same applies in reverse. The way a man dresses has a major impact upon whether a woman lusts after him or not.

 

As with the old man I referred to in another post. In his youth women always wore ground length dresses. For him to get a glimpse of a woman's ankle was enough to elicit lust in him. He also pointed out how much things have changed since then (which you and Irish reference) and how today seeing an ankle is nothing because so many women show nearly their whole body in public.

 

We could probably visit a dozen different IFB churches across the country and come up with a dozen different answers to questions about dress length, necklines, sleeves, etc. The same would probably be true when discussing the issue of women's hair and men's hair and beards. And several other matters would likely receive a dozen different replies too!

 

I know of IFB churches which say men are only allowed to wear white shirts. Some don't allow beards on men. What's accepted as a modest dress in one IFB church is considered immodest and not allowed in another.

 

It's obvious, even just among IFBs there is no agreement that Scripture speaks specifically to these matters which leaves these being gray.

 

That's a fact John, but the world says its not true, & many there be that belies the world. I hate to be blunt yet at times you've got to, men are turned on by sight, an immodest dressed woman can make thoughts go though a man's mind that would never enter his mind if they were dressed as the Lord instructs them.