WHERE HAVE THE STANDARDS GONE?

      

"So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God. Let us not therefore judge one another anymore: but judge this rather, that no one put a stumbling block or an occasion to sin in his brother's way."  Romans 14:12-13

We hear a great deal about the sin of David, but seldom does anyone mention the sin of Bath-Sheba. And it is true enough that David’s sin was very great, and Bath-Sheba’s very small. David’s sin was deliberate and presumptuous; Bath-Sheba’s only a sin of ignorance. David committed deliberate adultery and murder; Bath-Sheba only carelessly and undesignedly exposed herself before David’s eyes.

Yet it remains a fact that Bath-Sheba’s sin was the cause of David’s great sin. Her little sin of ignorance, her little thoughtless and careless exposure of herself, was the spark that kindled a great devouring flame. "Behold how great a forest is set aflame by such a small fire!" (James 3:5) On the one side only a little carelessness, only a little thoughtless, unintentional exposure of herself before the eyes of David. But on the other side, adultery and guilt of conscience; murder and the loss of a husband, besides the death in battle of other innocent men; great occasion for the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme; the shame of an illegitimate pregnancy, and the death of the child; the uprising and the death of Absalom; the defiling of David’s wives in the sight of all Israel; the sword never departing from David’s house (II Samuel 12:11-18).

Again I say, "Behold how great a forest is set aflame by such a small fire!" None of this great evil would ever have taken place if Bath-Sheba had only been careful to not display her body in the sight of a man. She neither designed nor foresaw any of this evil, yet she was the cause of it all. She did not display herself purposely or wantonly: she only did it ignorantly and thoughtlessly. Yet the results of her little sin of ignorance were just the same as if it had been purposeful wantonness.

There are many Christian women today who are guilty of the same carelessness as Bath-Sheba was. Godly women, who would recoil with horror from the very thought of wantonly displaying their bodies, do nevertheless carelessly and thoughtlessly display themselves habitually, by the manner in which they dress. I believe that they are not guilty of wantonness; they are as innocent of that as Bath-Sheba was. But neither can we altogether excuse them from blame in the matter. The whole world is well aware that certain kinds of feminine dress are provocative and tempting to the eyes and heart of a man and are Christian women alone altogether naive and ignorant?

NAKEDNESS BEFORE OTHERS IS SIN

An important point concerning the biblical definition of nakedness, we sometimes get the idea that nakedness refers only to having no clothing at all. However, this is neither true in the Bible nor in the dictionary. One of the definitions for "naked" in the dictionary is "without conventional or usual clothing." Many people do not know that the Bible often calls improper covering of the body nakedness. Most often it refers to the wearing of undergarments in public. This explains the nakedness of Saul (1 Samuel 19:24), of David (2 Samuel 6:14, 20; 1 Chronicles 15:27), of Isaiah (Isaiah 20:2-4), and of Peter (John 21:7). It is interesting that Peter did not want Jesus to see him naked.

We understand this definition in practice as well. The Bible teaches that improperly covered bodies are still naked. This is interesting in an age when many outer garments do not cover as much as undergarments did a short time ago.

Nakedness before the eyes of others is sin, whether it be a man or woman. When Adam and Eve sinned, God made "coats of skins, and clothed them." The sole reason for his clothing them was to cover their nakedness. He clothed them with coats. They were already wearing aprons, which probably covered them, yet despite their aprons they were still naked in their own eyes and in God's. And God did not clothe them with another apron, or anything of the sort, but with coats or robes as the word might properly be translated.

But if it is equally a sin for a man to expose his nakedness as it is for a woman, it is not equally dangerous, for the passions of women are not so easily aroused by the sight of a man's body and many women affirm, that the sight does not arouse them at all. A man therefore may (though he ought not to) go three-fourths naked, and not do much damage by it. But, when a woman exposes herself only a little, she becomes a fiery dart to tempt the heart of every man who sees her. Like it or not, this is a fact. And because this is true, a woman is not at liberty to dress any way she pleases. "Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body" (1 Cor. 6:19-20). But if a woman dresses in such a way as to expose her body, and if she fears God, she should not use the temple of the Holy Spirit as an instrument of unrighteousness to allure the eyes and tempt the hearts, and tantalize the passions of men.

Many men are wicked and will lust after a woman despite anything she can do to prevent it. They have "eyes full of adultery and that never cease from sin" (II Pet. 2:14). Should a woman therefore help them to sin? Should a woman put further temptation in their way? Will God excuse them if they do?

David was not wicked. He was a man after God’s own heart. But in the presence of an unclothed woman, he was weak and it would be a rare man who was not. Godly men are not wicked, but they may be weak. And the devil does all he can do to weaken them further. They are forced to live in a world where they are continually bombarded with sights that are designed by Satan to weaken their morals and destroy their purity of heart. Must Christian women help the devil to do his work by being a temptation to their brethren even in the church? A Christian woman should understand the fierce and bitter conflict in the souls of the brethren when they arouse their desires by the careless display of their feminine beauty. If only they could hear their pleadings with God for help and deliverance from the power of those temptations. If they could only see their tears of shame and repentance when the temptation has overcome them, and they have sinned with eyes and heart and mind. A woman has no right to destroy by their careless dress the brother for whom Christ died.

A woman's passions are not the same as a man's. They are (generally speaking) not as strong as a man's. Neither are they so easily excited or inflamed as a man's. Nor are they excited in the same manner as a man’s. If women could only understand the workings of a man's passion towards them, they would be more discreet and modest in their dress. A man’s passions are easily excited by the sight of a woman’s body, as was plainly the case with David and Bath-Sheba when he beheld her washing herself. Most men will not go so far as to seduce or rape you. But how do you know that they can resist the thought and desire of it? How do you know that they do not sin with their eyes and hearts and imagination? There is great pleasure to a man in merely looking and lusting, even though he goes no further. You know very well that the Bible says, "… everyone who looks on a woman to lust for her has committed adultery with her already in his heart" (Matt. 5:28), this is a serious matter, for it is a sin. Sin ruins and destroys and damns. Here is probably the most solemn statement in the Bible concerning the seriousness of sin, and it is spoken regarding the very sin which women so lightly and thoughtlessly commit by their careless dress. Many Christian women may say, "I dress modestly." If you follow the fashions and practices of this age, you assuredly do not dress modestly, for modesty is purposely ignored by many of them. And it may be that you, being a woman, and not able to see yourself through a man's eye, are unable to perceive that which may really be tempting and provocative in your own dress. God would have you to be "wise as serpents, and harmless as doves" (Matt. 10:16). But if you unthinkingly dress as the rest of the world does, you are assuredly neither wise nor harmless. Not wise, for however ignorant and innocent you may be, you are following a system of fashion that is designed by wicked men and devils to break down and destroy the morals of men. You make yourself a fiery dart in the hands of the devil to tempt every man who sees you.

The reason that God made clothing for Adam and Eve was to cover their nakedness, and any clothing that fails to do so cannot be right. Bare backs, bare midriffs, bare legs, and thighs, are wrong in the sight of God. Shorts, halter tops, swimming suits, and anything and everything else which intentionally leave you partially nude, have no place in the dress of a woman professing godliness. The things that we have mentioned are obviously and flagrantly a violation of the purpose of God in clothing you, and there should not be a question as to whether it is right. The standards of the church have sunk so low in our day that there are actually Christians and preachers who defend such things.

SHORT DRESSES

A godly woman doesn't need anyone to tell her that short dresses are wrong. The whole world knows that they are provocative in a man's eyes. Many Christian women who profess godliness, women who ought to know better follow the current fashions of the world, without any thought as to what is right. Others will argue as to how short is too short. A woman may stand at attention in front of a mirror, and persuade herself that her dress reveals nothing. But, what happens when she sits down, bends over, and gets in or out of a car? And whether you design it or not and whether you like it or not, those nude legs and thighs of yours are a provocation to lust in the eyes of men.

It is for this same reason a woman should not wear skirts or dresses which are slit halfway up the sides. The design of such a fashion is to expose your thighs to view. If a woman's skirt or dress is so tight that she cannot walk without cutting the sides, it is wrong. Many Christian women ask how long should our dresses be. A woman's legs should be well covered below the knees, front and back, while she is bending over or sitting down. Her dresses should cover her well below the knees in all postures.

LOW NECKLINES

It is well known that low, loose, or large necklines are a great temptation to the eyes of a man. A woman may stand erect in front of a mirror wearing a low, large, or loose neckline, and think it perfectly modest. But, when she bends over a little and the material of her blouse falls away from her body, immediately the most provocative and tempting part of her anatomy is exposed to the view of any man who happens to be standing in front of her.

The same is true when the top buttons of her blouse are unbuttoned. This looks provocative, even if nothing is exposed. It looks seductive. There can be no possible reason or excuse for leaving two or three buttons open. If a woman can leave her top button open, yet not expose her breasts when she bends it is alright. There is no part of a woman's body so tempting to a man as her breasts, and when a man sees a woman with the top buttons of her blouse open, it is a great temptation. Let your neckline be high enough and small enough to be a neckline and not a chest or shoulder line.

SLEEVELESS BLOUSES

Sleeveless blouses always reveal too much. Little as you may be able to understand it, your underarms, and the parts of your chest and of your back that immediately adjoin them, are very attractive to a man; and these are the parts that a sleeveless blouse displays.  A woman must also bear in mind that others will see her from all angles and in all positions, and the armholes of a sleeveless blouse will often allow a man to see inside the blouse, especially when her arms are uplifted or outstretched, thus displaying part of her chest, and probably some of her breasts. The same is true of a short-sleeved blouse which has very large or loose sleeves. This may be perfectly modest as long as she keeps her elbows at her sides, but as soon as she raises her arms she creates an opening through which a man may see inside her blouse. Remember you are a woman, and cannot see yourself as a man sees you.

SHEER CLOTHING

It ought to be unnecessary to say anything about clothing that is so sheer that a man may see through it. The undeniable design of such clothing is to thwart the purpose of clothing and expose your body rather than cover it. When a man sees you dressed in this, what can he think but that you intend to display your body to his sight? And yet so low are the standards in the church today that it is not uncommon to see Christian women wearing see-through clothing.

TIGHT CLOTHING

Clothing that explicitly reveals a woman's form is as bad as that which reveals her nakedness, such clothing is provocative. When a man sees a woman dressed in tight clothing that reveals and displays every curve of her form, his passions will be excited by the sight. The world calls tight clothing "revealing", which is exactly what it is, and as such it is an obvious violation of the purpose of God in clothing you. Every woman who professes godliness should reject every form of dress that reveals and displays her figure.

There is no sight which will surely attract a man's eyes, and so quickly inflame his passions, as the sight of a woman's breasts, whether they are actually exposed, or their form displayed by tight or clinging clothing.

When a man looks at a woman he should see her clothing, and not the shape and form of everything which is inside it. Sweaters, tee shirts, and knit blouses in their very nature cling to your body and reveal and display its shape and form of it. The shape and form of a woman’s body, even though it is covered with clothing, will draw a man's eyes, inflame his passions, or arouse his imagination.

PANTS

This is an issue that has divided churches, families, and friends. The background is this: historically men have always worn pants, and women dresses, this is an undisputed fact. The feminist movement has sought to put the pants on all the women, figuratively speaking. It has sought to "liberate" the woman from her God-anointed place of subjection to the man and to give her "equal rights" to do whatever the man does. The spirit of this movement has also put upon the woman’s body the man’s clothing namely, pants. Many churches have followed the world in so doing. The Word of God teaches (Deut. 22:5) that it is an abomination for a woman to wear pants. The younger generation, most of whom have grown up with women wearing pants, and who probably know nothing of the historical background of the issue, can see no point in the stand which the church takes, and so regard it as narrow-minded and petty. "The pants which women wear," they say, "were made for women and are not men's clothing."

On the one side, it may be argued that God made neither pants for Adam nor a dress for Eve, but coats for both of them. Yet Deut. 22:5 certainly assumes that the same clothing is not to be worn by both men and women, and it is also certain that historically pants have been the men’s clothing. It may be argued that the culture has changed so that pants are now acceptable clothing for women also. Yet when we consider the sinister forces that have fought to change God's Word, we may argue that the change is in no way recognized by God but is an abomination to him.

What effect does a woman wearing pants have on the eyes of men? Though you may not be able to understand it (for the sight of a man will probably not affect you in the same way), it is the sight, the form that will arouse a man's passions. What a man's touch is to a woman, the sight of a woman is to a man. By their very nature pants reveal and display a woman's form. Pants cling to every inch of their legs and thighs and hips and buttocks and crotch. A loose-fitting skirt or dress is the best possible clothing with which to conceal all of the tempting parts of the anatomy that reside between the woman's waist and knees.

Men derive great pleasure from looking at women. Why do you suppose that men spend millions of dollars every year on pornography? Let the pictures be left out of pornographic magazines, and see how many copies they would sell! What pleasure is it that men continually purchase at so great an expense? What pleasure can pictures afford them, except the pleasure of looking? It is looking at a woman's body that inflames a man's passions and imagination, and there is great pleasure in that looking. Most men will freely indulge in that pleasure, with little or no restraint. They will feast their eyes upon the feminine form wherever they may find it. Godly men will recognize that pleasure as sinful except when it is confined to their own wife, and they will fight hard to resist the temptation and conquer the sin. But because of the extreme strength and intensity of the male passions they find this to be a very hard fight. The spirit is willing but, in the face of strong temptations, the flesh is weak. Despite all their determination and praying and striving, they may find their eye seemingly involuntarily drawn to the sight of a beautiful and shapely woman, and a moment’s involuntary sight may be enough to take the heart away.

There is nothing wrong or evil about a woman's physical beauty. It is the creation of God, and is, like all that God created, "very good." It was designed by God for a specific purpose: the woman was made "for the man" (1 Cor. 11:9). The perfectly obvious design of your beauty is to satisfy the heart of a man, your husband, not of every man. If God has joined you to that one man, then by all means, give that beauty to him with all your heart. Thus satisfied, he will be less susceptible to the beauty and charms of other women. Thus used, the beauty of your body will glorify the God who gave it to you and serve the man for whom it was given. But if you put it on display, to the gaze of the whole world, you only glorify yourself and serve the devil.