Beach Day at Church

[dolfan]

I guess it could, depending on the type of petticoat, and the motive for wearing them.

Hold up. The motive matters to modesty? I thought we were measuring square inches of exposed flesh, bare midriffs and all that. I didn't know we were considering motives!

So, it is self-evident and obvious to you that a woman who is being baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit in a swimsuit, there in her swimsuit to announce her commitment to Christ, and in fact does so successfully, is possibly doing it with an immodest motive??? I'm more confused than ever now.

[Poimen]

I guess it could, depending on the type of petticoat, and the motive for wearing them.

Hold up. The motive matters to modesty? I thought we were measuring square inches of exposed flesh, bare midriffs and all that. I didn't know we were considering motives!

So, it is self-evident and obvious to you that a woman who is being baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit in a swimsuit, there in her swimsuit to announce her commitment to Christ, and in fact does so successfully, is possibly doing it with an immodest motive??? I'm more confused than ever now.

No, that's not what I mean. It can actually be both or one or the other.
Impure motives make the wearing of otherwise modest clothing wrong if worn with the wrong motive (such as pride)

But right motives (like getting baptized, or having no specific desire to illicit wantonness) do not make otherwise immodest clothing modest.

Is this really so confusing to you guys? It seems so easy to understand to me -- even my girls (ages 6, 5, and 4) get it.

[EagerBeaver]

Is this really so confusing to you guys? It seems so easy to understand to me -- even my girls (ages 6, 5, and 4) get it.

Yes, your statements seem to self-contradict as Dolfan just pointed out. If I was 4 I would "get it" too if that was all I was taught and told everyone else is wrong.

[Poimen]

Is this really so confusing to you guys? It seems so easy to understand to me -- even my girls (ages 6, 5, and 4) get it.

Yes, your statements seem to self-contradict as Dolfan just pointed out.

Well it is obvious to me then that you are not truly reading or understanding my comments. Perhaps your bias against my strictness here keeps you from seeing what it is I have actually said, but rather distorts it?

If I was 4 I would "get it" too if that was all I was taught and told everyone else is wrong.

Sure we've taught them to be modest. But when my child knows and/or is embarrassed to be seen by others, even daddy, in her undies, her swimsuit, or much less naked I know that intuitively she get's it. She understands the sense of propriety and modesty in not being revealed. She has shamefacedness.

[c u there]

Good post poimen, the problem is so many are not taught at a young age and that's when you can really teach them to value themselves and their bodies.

[macgulley]

In case anyone is wondering what is appropriate, I found this helpful little drawing on wikipedia

[Pastor Gary]

But when my child knows and/or is embarrassed to be seen by others, even daddy, in her undies, her swimsuit, or much less naked I know that intuitively she get's it. She understands the sense of propriety and modesty in not being revealed. She has shamefacedness.

If my 4-year-old daughter felt she had to be embarrassed in her swimsuit in front of her daddy, I would cry myself to sleep every night.

There is NOTHING (nada, zip, zero) about a 4-year-old's body that should cause them shame in front of a parent of either gender. Period.

[Poimen]

If my 4-year-old daughter felt she had to be embarrassed in her swimsuit in front of her daddy, I would cry myself to sleep every night.

I have counseled them that when swimming together it's okay if daddy sees them, and occasionally it might be that daddy can't help but see them in those other ways. But they know that daddy is a boy and that boys shouldn't see them scantly clothed. That was my point.

There is NOTHING (nada, zip, zero) about a 4-year-old's body that should cause them shame in front of a parent of either gender. Period.

Shame as in a sense of guilt, no. Embarrassment of being seen by "boys", yes. And it should naturally give them pause to understand why daddy is an exception, and when, since he is a boy.

If they didn't feel that way then I would hope I too would then cry myself to sleep for failing to instill godly principles of modesty in them -- especially when this society is so rife with sensuality and exploitation of sexuality, even of teens and pre-teens (i.e. Disney, etc.).

Train up a child in the way it should go, and all that.

[Poimen]

Good post poimen, the problem is so many are not taught at a young age and that's when you can really teach them to value themselves and their bodies.

Thank you Sis. I was beginning to wonder if virtually all of Jude had gone nude.

Tongue in cheek humor there guys. Hope you can chuckle with me.

[Shepherd]

p

[Shepherd]

[Pastor Gary]

Poimen is not the first to address shamefacedness and modesty.

...and HERE they come; the TCOG lurkers who never contribute to the dialog here at Jude2 come circling the wagons.

[Shepherd]

h

[Shepherd]

[Shepherd]

,