Jump to content
  • Welcome to Online Baptist

    Free to join.

Thief on the Cross

What would you do?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Salyan said:

She's explaining it from the point of view of the visitor, and she's right. To walk up to a first time, possibly unsaved visitor and tell them that they have to change their clothing to visit the building/service, no matter how 'kindly' meant, is just plain rude.  (And kind intentions are no excuse for rude behavior.) The visitor will feel humiliated and unwelcome.  

Exactly. I know if I had been spoken to about my clothing the first time I set foot in a church, I'd have never returned. In my pre-IFB days, my primary wardrobe was jeans, concert t-shirts or tank tops and tennis shoes. If I had gone into a church and someone decided to pick on my wardrobe rather than being happy I was at least there, well...my mouth would have gotten the best of me and I'd have never returned. It would have also reinforced the idea I had that Christianity was some exclusive club that only took those who walked, talked, lived a certain way. Fortunately, we were blessed to find a church that did not look down on us because of our situation (pretty much dirt poor and on welfare). We were immediately surrounded by love...and that is what made the difference. 

So, the next time someone shows up at church in raggedy clothing or revealing clothing, understand, they don't know any better and it's not YOUR job to point that out in their first visit. Love them, pray for and with them, and let GOD do what He's good at. Years ago there was a t-shirt that was very popular among the Christian crowd. It said "Fisher of men, I catch them, HE cleans them". There's a lot of profound wisdom in that short, pithy saying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saved41199 said:

So, the next time someone shows up at church in raggedy clothing or revealing clothing, understand, they don't know any better and it's not YOUR job to point that out in their first visit.

Just out of curiosity, since I;m assuming that you wouldn't allow someone to come in to your church wearing, to the extreme, as little as a bikini, where would you draw the line to where you would speak to them?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Brother Stafford said:

Just out of curiosity, since I;m assuming that you wouldn't allow someone to come in to your church wearing, to the extreme, as little as a bikini, where would you draw the line to where you would speak to them?  

I live in Las Vegas...there are times when you're happy with the bare legal minimum (which ain't much in Sin City). 

In terms of "allowing"...it ain't your church, it ain't my church, it's God's church. 

Now...quit it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been reading through all the comments and finding them interesting.

  I am still after several years attending an IFB church ,( which I love for the most part) trying to figure out some of the practices.   The dress code has always been one .  You see I attened 2 different churches prior, well actually 3.  The church I was saved in I only attened 3 times as I moved , it was a sovereign grace baptist.    I attened in jeans , no one looked at me differently,  believe me I was looking for it.     After that attended community church and then fellowship baptist.  What I don't undrrstand is why I was never convicted of the Lord or by any church member all 9 yrs about my clothing.   It was never ever mentioned , preached or talked about,  it was a non issue.    When first saved I read and read every spare moment the bible, its all I wanted to do.   You would think the spirit would have convicted me in that time.     It wasn't until attending the IFB that I had ever heard of such a thing , except for cults like Amish or Mennonite.       What I was convicted of though were my thoughts.   I did not want to dress any longer to appear attractive to the opposite sex or to make other women jealous.      Never did that equate to never wearing pants.      Never all those years prior did I ever look at someones outward appearance and judge whether or not I think them to be saved or sanctified.    I hear this alot where I attend, that people can tell your different by the way you dress.    I will be brutally honest here.    I REALLY dont get it.   The preoccupation of clothing with the IFB , the ties the skirts and dresses ,  the whole dressing for the Lord.    Some of the best times with the Lord Im in my PJs.     I find it to be a burden , that has brought me to tears some Sunday mornings as I look for something to wear that won't draw LOOKS in my direction.     I have never felt the pleasure of the Lord in my spirit by anything I have put on my flesh.  

I am concerned for my son with this issue,  I dont want him to be preoccupied with this.  I dont ever want him to look at a person and make a judgement about them by their outward appearance.     I have had to rebuke him several times.   Once he pointed out a man on the road with tattoos and mentioned "how ungodly "  that man is.   It broke my heart.     There are so many wonderful things about our church , but the clothing , outward appearance issues IMO is not one of them.    I sincerely hope I am not offending anyone,  that is not my intention.  Im just speaking from where Im seeing things.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, that's a very fair assessment. Honestly, speaking as a person who does tend to judge outward appearances (although I know I shouldn't), I wish I had your disregard for them!  My observance is that the churches, like people, tend to swing to one of two opposite extremes - either the liberal or the legalistic. Either clothes don't matter at all, or they matter too much.

There are several guidelines I think we can defend Biblically.  You made mention of a couple of them in your testimony above.

1. Modest Apparel (1 Tim. 2:9)  This includes
     A. Covering the body appropriately. 
           This principle was set in place by God Himself in clothing Adam & Eve after the fall. There isn't as much clear definition in Scripture as I'd like to have defining modesty, for sure. I like Isaiah 47:2-3 for a (somewhat lopsided) definition. 
    B. Not dressing out of pride or ostentation (gold & pearls & costly array)

2. Not dressing like the opposite gender (Deut. 2:5)
     Much as I would love this verse to apply to all forms of pants -  I really don't think pants are modest at all, unless you're skiing or trapeze walking - I honestly don't believe we can apply it so in this generation. Three generations ago, sure. 

3. Not causing our brother to stumble (Rom. 14:13, 21)
    I think this, here, ought to cause us ladies to watch our clothing. Men are absolutely responsible for their own thoughts, and this must not be corrupted to blame women for men's sins, but if we really care for our brothers, wouldn't we want to give them a break  from everything this world throws at them?

There's one more guideline that I live by, but I'm not sure if it's quite so much a Biblical guideline so much as a cultural one. And that is that in this culture, we wear out best when going to important places or to meet important people. Different people, depending on their background, or current circumstances, may have widely varied levels of 'best', but the point is that they are being respectful and honoring God by dressing up. (this is constrained by the Biblical principles, of course - I have a fancy dress for concerts that would be too ostentatious for church.)

Edited to add: I do absolutely believe that churches and camps, like any other organization, have the right to set dress standards for their workers. If people don't wish to submit to the standards, they are free to not assist in that area. This isn't the same as simply attending. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What disturbs me greatly here is the idea of "my church" or "your church". The church does not belong to men...It belongs to Christ. 

A person can wear the "right" clothes, say the "right" things and still have a heart blacker than the night. Yet, that person would be welcomed and accepted in IFB-world over someone who isn't wearing the "right" clothes or saying the "right" things, yet DOES the things that Jesus tells us to do "love one another as I have loved you". 

We, as people, cannot judge hearts. So what if someone shows up in a bikini or speedos? Shouldn't you just thank God that they came to church to hear the Gospel? 

Give it a rest folks...clothing is the LEAST of things we should worry about...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Saved41199 said:

What disturbs me greatly here is the idea of "my church" or "your church". The church does not belong to men...It belongs to Christ. 

A person can wear the "right" clothes, say the "right" things and still have a heart blacker than the night. Yet, that person would be welcomed and accepted in IFB-world over someone who isn't wearing the "right" clothes or saying the "right" things, yet DOES the things that Jesus tells us to do "love one another as I have loved you". 

We, as people, cannot judge hearts. So what if someone shows up in a bikini or speedos? Shouldn't you just thank God that they came to church to hear the Gospel? 

Give it a rest folks...clothing is the LEAST of things we should worry about...

Well to be fair, saying "my church" doesn't necessarily imply the idea of ownership it actually also contains the idea of belonging to something or associations with something. for example, if I say "my school" it doesn't mean I own it, it means I belong to it, that I have membership. Consider similar phrase "my country" or "my nation" "my tribe" etc. 

Yes the church belongs to Jesus Christ, but honestly how many people who say "my church" actually mean that they think it belongs to them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/4/2018 at 7:28 PM, Brother Stafford said:

Just out of curiosity, since I'm assuming that you wouldn't allow someone to come in to your church wearing, to the extreme, as little as a bikini, where would you draw the line to where you would speak to them?  

 

5 hours ago, Saved41199 said:

So what if someone shows up in a bikini or speedos? Shouldn't you just thank God that they came to church to hear the Gospel? 

Give it a rest folks...clothing is the LEAST of things we should worry about...

Thank you for answering my question.  I appreciate you being candid and honest with your position.  What you have seemingly deemed acceptable attire for church attendance is what the Bible calls nakedness (Ex. 20:26, 28:42 &c.).  To have no issue with anyone attending a church while biblically naked, and, essentially, in their underwear, is beyond obscene and is objectively wrong by biblical standards.  I was planning to not speak anymore on this, but this is just plain wickedness.

While I admire your zeal for reaching the lost, what about the saved?  Men have to constantly guard their eyes and thoughts because of the carelessness of immodest women in the world.  Although many saved men experience a certain amount of relief from this issue, being saved does not eliminate the issue entirely.  For many men, church attendance offers a brief respite from the constant barrage of immodest imagery offered by the world.  If a member is struggling with porn addiction, for example, allowing immodestly dressed people into the church would be incredibly cruel to that member.  Cannot they at least have the expectation of a sanctuary when gathering with others to worship God?

This goes for women too.  In my past, I had known many women that spoke very candidly about how certain visual aspects of men cause their thoughts to drift.  Over the years, I have had many women call attention to and compliment, in one way or another, my posterior.  For years now, I have gone out of my way to make certain that my pants completely disguise the shape of that aspect of me, when I am out in public, and I always wear a suit jacket that covers that area while attending church services.  I also keep my tattoos covered and I always wear long sleeve, loose fitting, button down shirts; in church or in public.

Guests should also be able to experience an atmosphere where sexual temptations are eliminated as much as possible.  Immodestly dressed members, or other immodestly dressed guests, can provide a very strong distraction and interfere with them hearing the Gospel being presented. Requiring appropriate clothing from both guests and members is for the benefit of both the guests and members.

Edited by Brother Stafford

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Brother Stafford said:

While I admire your zeal for reaching the lost, what about the saved?  Men have to constantly guard their eyes and thoughts because of the carelessness of immodest women in the world. 

Ummm....nope. Men need to learn SELF-CONTROL. Seriously. My husband can walk down the Strip and not have a single untoward reaction to any of the lovely ladies hanging out. Men can control their own thoughts. Now, do you think women aren't affected visually? I mean, I'm old, not dead. Yet, I can look at a nice-looking man and not think about anything other than..."gee, nice looking guy". 

I'm sick and tired of men blaming women for their lack of self control. I would point you to Galatians 5:22-23 

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

You do know what "temperance" is, right? It's self-control. 

3 hours ago, Brother Stafford said:

If a member is struggling with porn addiction, for example, allowing immodestly dressed people into the church would be incredibly cruel to that member.  Cannot they at least have the expectation of a sanctuary when gathering with others to worship God?

Gee...there's that self-control thing again. It is entirely possible to go through life without being tempted by pornography, need some sort of blocking software or controls on your computer. My husband has done it for at least 21 years. 

 

3 hours ago, Brother Stafford said:

Guests should also be able to experience an atmosphere where sexual temptations are eliminated as much as possible.  Immodestly dressed members, or other immodestly dressed guests, can provide a very strong distraction and interfere with them hearing the Gospel being presented. Requiring appropriate clothing from both guests and members is for the benefit of both the guests and members.

No, Christians should be able to develop self-control. Get over it. Women have curves and bumps. Men have certain attributes. That's the way God made us. If it makes you get utterly hormonally irrational, then YOU have the problem. Not me. My husband traveled the world in the Navy. I'm sure he saw all sorts of sights...yet, know what makes him more of a man? SELF-CONTROL. Yes, he went to bars, topless bars...and didn't lose his marbles in them. He came home to me. There has been no pornography in my house for 20+ years. Why? Because he is not interested in other women. Why? SELF-CONTROL. 

Don't blame women for your inability to control your own thoughts. You're not an animal, driven by hormonal lusts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Brother Stafford said:

I don't know what else to say.  That attitude is unscriptural, ungodly and completely lacking in compassion.  I'm done here.

"Unscriptural"...I quoted Galatians 5:22-23.

"Ungodly"...saying that a Christian should exhibit the fruit of the Spirit as found in Galatians 5:22-23

"Lacking in compassion"...saying a Christian should endeavor to exhibit the fruit of the Spirit as found in Galatians 5:22-23.

What I see is a bunch of men refusing to take responsibility for their own thoughts and actions...kind of like when Adam blamed Eve. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a solution for the debate on clothing. We should all go back to wearing tunics like the bible times.   Yes Im being silly,  but honestly I would be all for it.  I wouldn't have to think about what to wear.  No one could judge another about their spiritual state based on what their wearing.   And comfortable!!  Im mean what could be more comfy.   

I understand everyones point of veiw to some extent.   As far as bikinis and Speedos go.  I personally cant see anyone entering a church wearing one,  unless their intention was to offend.   Or maybe if you decided to hold a service on the beach, then perhaps. 

I do believe that the IFB does put more pressure on women to be modest than men.   I see way to many men with their pants far to snug , And I have Never heard anything preached at them.   Alot of women now a days , (and its an awful thing) are addicted to pornography as well.   I do believe we are all accountable to one another and should help each other to not sin.   But it can go overboard,  thats why  so many of the Arab nation have their women wear burkas.    When we take all responsibility away from men for watching their eyes and controlling their thoughts, it puts a heavy burden on women and allows men to believe they are not responsible for their actions.    

So many times when a Christian man falls in adultery,   what I hear is more preaching about covering up directed toward women.  The man is talked about as a poor brother that fell.   I find it disturbing.     

 Im all for modesty ,  I believe that I do dress modest , even when I do wear pants.   I see others will disagree with me.   And I know that many in my church feel Im less sanctified and a lesser christian because I dont see things their way.   I guess that's just the way it will have to be unless the Lord tells me different.    I do understand that everyone has their own personal convictions,  and I do respect that.    

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Thief on the Cross said:

So many times when a Christian man falls in adultery,   what I hear is more preaching about covering up directed toward women.  The man is talked about as a poor brother that fell.   I find it disturbing.     

Yes! It seems that men are given a pass...they just can't help it. 

I work in a male-dominated industry. Yes, I dress fairly modestly most of the time, yet...it is not my responsibility to keep some man from losing self-control. I see many men wearing things that I might consider inappropriate...like the guys who walk home from the pool in wet swim suits that leave nothing to the imagination. I may notice it, but it doesn't cause me to "lust" after them. There's only ONE man that I go completely ga-ga over...just one. I've been married to him for a long time.

This whole thing over pornography, "modesty", etc. is just an excuse for not exercising self-control. Personally, I have NEVER had the urge to look at pornography. It's just not something I'm interested in. I don't watch "chick flicks", I don't read romance novels either. I find them a waste of my time. Now, if there's a good sci-fi movie or series on, or a good drama, or something with lots of explosions and car chases, I'm there. My reason for not being interested in those things is simple...sex is not a spectator sport. 

I spoke with my husband about this last night and read him some of the posts. Poor guy's eyes rolled so far back into his head I think he saw his own brain. Something about needing to grow up, learning respect, and yes, developing self control were in his comments. We're talking about a retired 24 year sailor here. 

So, for all you men who are so fragile that the glimpse of a shoulder or a curve can turn you into a boiling pot of lust, it's not the woman's fault, it's your own. Seeing women as human beings that are not property to control will go a long way to resolving your lust issues. 

Edited by Jim_Alaska
administrator edit for poor choice of language

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let us get this Biblically correct:

1.  If a saved man lusts after a woman (that is not his wife), it is a wicked sin against the Lord his God and Savior.  It does not matter if the woman is dressed immodestly or modestly.  That man committed sin against the Lord, and HE is at fault before the Lord.  (This principle would be true in reverse for a saved woman who lusts as well.  However, the specific passage of Scripture in mind sets its focus upon men; therefore, I have done the same.)

2.  If a saved woman dresses immodestly within a public arena (not in the privacy of her relationship with her husband), it is a wicked sin against the Lord her God and Savior.  It does not matter if a man lusts after her or not, or even if a man is actually present who might lust after her.  That woman committed sin against the Lord, and SHE is at fault before the Lord.  (This principle would also be true in reverse for a saved man who dresses immodestly.  However, the specific passage of Scripture in mind sets its focus upon women; therefore, I have done the same.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Let us get this Biblically correct:

1.  If a saved man lusts after a woman (that is not his wife), it is a wicked sin against the Lord his God and Savior.  It does not matter if the woman is dressed immodestly or modestly.  That man committed sin against the Lord, and HE is at fault before the Lord.  (This principle would be true in reverse for a saved woman who lusts as well.  However, the specific passage of Scripture in mind sets its focus upon men; therefore, I have done the same.)

2.  If a saved woman dresses immodestly within a public arena (not in the privacy of her relationship with her husband), it is a wicked sin against the Lord her God and Savior.  It does not matter if a man lusts after her or not, or even if a man is actually present who might lust after her.  That woman committed sin against the Lord, and SHE is at fault before the Lord.  (This principle would also be true in reverse for a saved man who dresses immodestly.  However, the specific passage of Scripture in mind sets its focus upon women; therefore, I have done the same.)

citations please. From the New Testament, with proper cultural and historical exegesis please. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother Stafford, may I ask how you would respond to the original question.  Please understand Im not trying to argue with you.  I believe by your responses that you love the church and its people.   I know we dont see some things the same,  but would like to know your opinion on what would Be the best way to deal with someone dressed like described in the OP.    If you dont want to answer thats fine.  

Also I agree completely that both saved men and women are responsible for their thoughts and actions.   But an unsaved is not in the same way.  They are in bondage held captive by the enemy.  We should first be concerned with their souls , before clothing.    I dont want to forget those the Lord used , some of them were Harlots.  Why was Mary Magdalene drawn to the Lord, because he had compasion on her , I believe.    I would have to do the same with soneone thats walked in , in the attire of a harlot.    Maybe its because Im a woman, and one that lived in the world for 36 yrs.  I would like to think as christians we woukd put aside our comfort for a while in hopes that a soul might be saved.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sin by character is wicked.  Sin by definition is any transgression against the will or Word of God.

1.  Matthew 5:27-28 -- "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery.  But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in her heart."  Herein our Lord Jesus Christ was NOT cancelling the prohibition against adultery, as if it no longer applied.  Rather, herein our Lord Jesus Christ was revealing that sexual lust in one's heart is equally as offensive in the sight of God as sexual adultery in one's actions.  Clearly the emphasis that our Lord provides is upon the behavior of the male gender (although this does not exclude the application of the principle from the female gender).  Furthermore, the emphasis that our Lord provides is upon the HEART-behavior of the individual, not just upon the outward-behavior of the individual.  The specific HEART-behavior that our Lord confronts and condemns is that of lusting after a woman.  This sinful scenario begins with a look, that carries a purpose or result of lusting within after a woman.  No further action is necessary.  Our Lord clearly states that this internal lusting after the woman is in the sight of God a commission of ADULTERY with her ALREADY in his heart.  She does not have to agree.  She does not have to even know.  How she is attired does not matter.  Our Lord Jesus Christ did not grant any avenue of excuse for the man.  He has already committed a wicked sin against the Lord his God.  Culture is irrelevant; it is a matter of the heart in the sight of the Lord God.

2.  1 Timothy 2:9-10 -- "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; but (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works."  Herein we find a New Testament instruction that clearly places its emphasis upon the behavior of the female gender (although this does not exclude the application of the principle from the male gender).  Furthermore, the emphasis of this instruction concerns the external apparel and attire of women professing godliness.  Women of God are required by the Lord our God to adorn themselves in a modest manner.  This is the opposite of a "show-offish" manner.  In that time the most common purpose for showing-off concerned one's material wealth or physical beauty.  Thus the passage provides such examples of showiness as "broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array."  However, the precept for "modest apparel" is all inclusive, encompassing any manner of showiness.  Even so, in our time another common purpose for showing-off concerns one's sexiness and sexual attraction.  This also would be contrary to the precept for modest apparel.  Yet the passage does not emphasize only the matter of external apparel, but also indicates that a woman's choice of modest apparel should be founded upon a modest spirit, "with shamefacedness and sobriety."  Such would be equivalent to the "meek and quiet spirit" of 1 Peter 3:4, "which is in the sight OF GOD of great price."  Finally, the passage emphasizes that women of God are to pursue the spiritual adornment and attractiveness of good, godly works.  Thus a woman of God is to be filled with a Spirit-filled attitude of modesty and meekness, to be externally adorned with modest apparel and attire, and to be spiritually adorned with good works.  Certainly, the culture may change its fashions of showiness; however, the precept against showiness remains in any cultural setting.  For a woman of God to transgress any part of this instruction is for her to commit a wicked sin against the Lord her God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Sin by character is wicked.  Sin by definition is any transgression against the will or Word of God.

nice try, not buying it. I specifically requested biblical support for your opinions on clothing and how a woman's "immodest dress" directly causes a man (any man) to sin. I requested citations, proper exegesis and looking at the cultural and historical context. You went off on a tangent. That doesn't work with me. Try it again. 

 

15 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Women of God are required by the Lord our God to adorn themselves in a modest manner. 

Modest how? Outwardly, or with a gentle spirit? I can dress in the most "modest" way imaginable and yet be immodest by calling attention to how modest I am. 

Also, in that quote, where's the idea that men would "stumble"? 

15 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Furthermore, the emphasis that our Lord provides is upon the HEART-behavior of the individual, not just upon the outward-behavior of the individual.  The specific HEART-behavior that our Lord confronts and condemns is that of lusting after a woman.  This sinful scenario begins with a look, that carries a purpose or result of lusting within after a woman.  No further action is necessary.  Our Lord clearly states that this internal lusting after the woman is in the sight of God a commission of ADULTERY with her ALREADY in his heart.  She does not have to agree.  She does not have to even know.  How she is attired does not matter.

Hmm....there's that pesky idea of self-control again. 

I'm currently wearing a scoop neck, short-sleeved top with appropriate underthings, and a skirt that goes to mid-calf. Some random guy might get turned on by the lumps on my chest that can't be hidden unless I wear a tent. Is it my problem he goes nuts? Nope. It's not. My physical attributes do not exist just to make some guy get hormonal. 

Again, a man's reaction to my clothing is not my problem. HE needs to discover that my existence is not to blame for whatever thoughts go popping into his head. 

But...men are convinced (by the church) that they're nothing more than meat sacks of uncontrollable hormones. If you're silly enough to buy that, you've just lowered yourself to being an animal. Animals can't control their lusts. Men can. 

PS...I broke my sons of saying "I couldn't help it" very early in their lives. They were taught they were fully responsible for every word and action in their lives. I broke them of blaming someone or something else too. My response to "He/She made me...." was this: "Was someone holding a gun to your head and forcing you to do/say whatever it was? No? Then you did it because you wanted to do it." They take full responsibility for everything they do, even if it's something they shouldn't have done. 

Edited by Saved41199

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, Thief on the Cross said:

Brother Stafford, may I ask how you would respond to the original question...

 

On 8/27/2018 at 3:44 PM, Thief on the Cross said:

Well they have this woman that attends every once in awhile.   She dresses , well like the world,  the bible would call it a harlot.   Anyway, she is unsaved as of yet.   She wears what my friend says is "cleavage first" and a short skirt... Opinions on what you might do?   

If a woman was dressed as you described, either myself or someone else given the task (preferably another woman), would speak to her in the same manner as if she entered in a bikini or her undergarments and tell her that we would love to have her attend our services but that she needs to wear something more appropriate.  If she doesn't understand what that means, the person speaking with her would give her examples of what would be acceptable.  We would make sure to repeat that we are looking forward to fellowshipping with her (or him).  This would be done with kindness.

If they are offended by that and decide not to return, like I have said before, I have no problem with that.  We are not responsible for making sure every lost person comes to Christ.  We are responsible for sharing the Gospel with them.  However, just as I would not enter a lingerie store or a strip club in order to share the Gospel, I would not allow the Lingerie store or strip club into a church. 

Jesus ate with publicans and sinners (Mark 2:13-17), but He didn't invite them to the temple.  In fact, Jesus got quite angry at the temple:

Quote

(John 2:13-17) "¶ And the Jews’ passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem, {14} And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting: {15} And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables; {16} And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise. {17} And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up."

I wonder if that caused any of the bystanders (or , perhaps Roman or Greek visitors) to not want to return or listen to what He had to say.  He also had quite a few harsh words to say to the scribes and the Pharisees while at the temple (Mt. 23, Mt. 24:1) that I am sure may have put many visitors off.

Quote

(Luke 9:3-6) "And he said unto them, Take nothing for your journey, neither staves, nor scrip, neither bread, neither money; neither have two coats apiece. {4} And whatsoever house ye enter into, there abide, and thence depart. {5} And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city, shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them. {6} And they departed, and went through the towns, preaching the gospel, and healing every where."

He was telling His disciples to share the Gospel everywhere, but that if they are rejected, to not dwell on it and to move on.  This is my feeling about visitors in churches.  They are welcome, but they cannot be disruptive in dress or behavior.  If that offends them, let them go on their way.  If they can't handle being told that they need to dress appropriately, then how are they going to handle hearing some of the convicting preaching about sin and Hell?

P.S. It is my personal opinion that churches should use caution when allowing visitors to attend.  I believe that the majority of the soul-winning of the lost should be done outside of church.  I feel strongly that members should only invite guests that they have spoken with and who have shown at least some sort of interest in the things of God.  There are plenty of things that believers can hear preached and can understand, but that would confuse or put off the still lost.  There have been instances where visitors from other churches or even other denominations have caused discord among existing members.  These are a few examples why I believe we should use caution with visitors, and, as I said, it is only my opinion.

P.P.S. It just occurred to me that I can't recall guests and visitors being mentioned in the epistles.  Now I want to go see if I can find some verses about the subject.

 

Edited by Brother Stafford

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Saved41199 said:

nice try, not buying it. I specifically requested biblical support for your opinions on clothing and how a woman's "immodest dress" directly causes a man (any man) to sin. I requested citations, proper exegesis and looking at the cultural and historical context. You went off on a tangent. That doesn't work with me. Try it again. (emboldening added by Pastor Scott Markle)

Well, the emboldened part of your quote above is where you have your failure in relation to my earlier posting.  My earlier posting NO WHERE indicated that a woman's immodest dress CAUSES a man to sin, or that she is AT ALL responsible for his sin.  I have NO NEED to support that opinion, specifically because it is NOT my opinion.  Rather, my earlier posting indicated that a man is at fault for sin against the Lord his God through lust REGARDLESS of the woman's behavior.  You might want to read again, as follows:

2 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

1.  If a saved man lusts after a woman (that is not his wife), it is a wicked sin against the Lord his God and Savior.  It does not matter if the woman is dressed immodestly or modestly.  That man committed sin against the Lord, and HE is at fault before the Lord.  (This principle would be true in reverse for a saved woman who lusts as well.  However, the specific passage of Scripture in mind sets its focus upon men; therefore, I have done the same.) (emboldening added by Pastor Scott Markle)

Furthermore, my earlier posting also indicated that a woman is at fault for sin against the Lord her God if she wears immodest apparel, REGARDLESS of whether a man chooses to lust after her or not.  You might want to read again, as follows:

2 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

2.  If a saved woman dresses immodestly within a public arena (not in the privacy of her relationship with her husband), it is a wicked sin against the Lord her God and Savior.  It does not matter if a man lusts after her or not, or even if a man is actually present who might lust after her.  That woman committed sin against the Lord, and SHE is at fault before the Lord.  (This principle would also be true in reverse for a saved man who dresses immodestly.  However, the specific passage of Scripture in mind sets its focus upon women; therefore, I have done the same.) (emboldening added by Pastor Scott Markle)

My additional posting, as per your request, provided the two Biblical passages wherein the two Biblical commands are provided for the two positions that I presented in my previous posting.  The man in point #1 has committed sin because he transgressed the command of Matthew 5:28.  The woman in point #2 has committed sin because she transgressed the command of 1 Timothy 2:9-10.  It really does not matter what any other person may or may not do.  Breaking the respective command in each case IS SIN.

By the way, in my earlier posting there was also NO hint of BLAME SHIFTING.  Each individual is responsible before the Lord God for his or her OWN behavior, whether it be obedient or disobedient to the respective command of God's Word.

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle
grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brother Stafford said:

P.S. It is my personal opinion that churches should use caution when allowing visitors to attend.  I believe that the majority of the soul-winning of the lost should be done outside of church.  I feel strongly that members should only invite guests that they have spoken with and who have shown at least some sort of interest in the things of God.  There are plenty of things that believers can hear preached and can understand, but that would confuse or put off the still lost.  There have been instances where visitors from other churches or even other denominations have caused discord among existing members.  These are a few examples why I believe we should use caution with visitors, and, as I said, it is only my opinion.

So you have to show your membership card and secret decoder ring to get in the door? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2018 at 7:28 PM, Alan said:

I Timothy 3:15, “But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.”

The “house of God” that Paul is referring to the local assembly of the believers. The Apostle Paul is admonishing Timothy to behave himself in the local assembly of believers; the church. The local church was an assembly in an area of a community. It was the visible assembly of the saints in the New Testament. The church may be in a house, a rented building, or a building that was bought for the purpose of the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

In 1 and 2 Timothy Paul the Apostle give Timothy, and every saint in the New Testament, instructions “how” to behave himself in the local assembly of believers in the church. 

 

 

All visitors are cordially welcomed to visit churches.

All of the churches that we have started we have welcomed all folks, with all types of backgrounds, with opened arms.

All people should learn "how" they should behave in the "house of God." The church is, or at least should be, "...the house of God." The invisible head of the New Testament church is the Lord Jesus Christ and the pastor is his under-shepherd. The godly Pastor (please note the word 'godly'), knows the difference between 'modest' apparel and 'immodest' apparel.  

The "Progressive" churches, liberal churches, and many other churches in our Laodicean Age, are not teaching the saints, nor the sinners, "how to behave in the house of God." Part of the reason is that they are not 'godly.'

Those saints who refuse (after careful teaching),to learn "how to behave in the house of God," should not be in a position of authority in the church nor represent the church in any fashion.

Included on "how to behave in the house of God," is: our speech, our behaviour, our dress, our actions, our doctrines, our attitudes, and our compassion shown towards others.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Saved41199 said:

So you have to show your membership card and secret decoder ring to get in the door? 

Yes.  That is exactly what I am saying.  We're not actually a church.  We're just using that as a front to push Ovaltine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saved41199 said:

So you have to show your membership card and secret decoder ring to get in the door? 

Sarcastic comments such as this are unbecoming to Christians. I, for one, can do without them and would encourage your future comments written in a godly manner. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   2 Members, 0 Anonymous, 27 Guests (See full list)

Article Categories

About Us

Since 2001, Online Baptist has been an Independent Baptist website, and we exclusively use the King James Version of the Bible. We pride ourselves on a community that uplifts the Lord.

Contact Us

You can contact us using the following link. Contact Us or for questions regarding this website please contact @pastormatt or email James Foley at jfoley@sisqtel.net

Android App

Online Baptist has a custom App for all android users. You can download it from the Google Play store or click the following icon.

×
×
  • Create New...