Judgement Question?

Poimen · Postby **Poimen** » February 27th, 2006, 8:35 am

Yes. For me it doesn't matter where it's at. When people in general congregate in that kind of setting I think it is irresponsible.

Pastor Bill · Postby **Pastor Bill** » February 27th, 2006, 8:38 am

Poimen, how would separating them be any different? would that modesty not extend to same sex swimming, especially with the direction the world is going, and young women experimenting much more with same sex encounters?

If it's not appropriate to wear, then it's not. In the water or out of the water. If your children wore more clothing would you consider it appropriate? and if so, how much clothing would you consider needed? Long shorts & T-shirts? or are you one that requires covering to the ankles & wrists (not being smart, I just do know some that feel this way)

MrDanger · Postby **MrDanger** » February 27th, 2006, 8:39 am

I have a question for those of you that are against this:

A few years ago, Kimmy and I were fortunate enough to go to Cyprus on a missions trip to help run a church camp. The first day, we were instructed for health reasons we needed to go to the sea to atleast soak (completely) in the water. This is because of the extreme temperatures. That day, a few of the Americans didn't go because of the mixed group. It was so hot, they joined us the second day.

Did I act irresponsibly or participate in inappropriate behavior?

Poimen · Postby **Poimen** » February 27th, 2006, 9:03 am

I hear ya Pastor Bill. You raise a good point. Fortunantley, the homo scene is not as prominent in rural AL as it seems to be elsewhere. And the natural desires are common to everyone whereas unnatural desires are evidently wrong, but not a problem for everyone. Ina setting where you have those -- you should seperate them or dress extra or something to avoid that.

What I measn is, I can see where girls might show more of themselves in all girl compnay or at home for various reasons (not just swim wear). But you are right, because of the increase in bisexual and homo sexual activity we must take protective and preventative steps I would think.

I suppose that where modest clothing could be worn in water I don't see any other error in having water fun itself. That's why I said what I did about the wholesome swimwear line. :lol:

No -- I'm not an ankles and wrist to chin kinda person. But, I do feel like the scripture speaks enough generally on nakedness, and various parts of the body being identified sexually, to let us know that thighs, bellies, and breasts are or should be "private" areas.

Poimen · Postby **Poimen** » February 27th, 2006, 9:06 am

MrDanger wrote:I have a question for those of you that are against this:

A few years ago, Kimmy and I were fortunate enough to go to Cyprus on a missions trip to help run a church camp. The first day, we were instructed for health reasons we needed to go to the sea to atleast soak (completely) in the water. This is because of the extreme temperatures. That day, a few of the Americans didn't go because of the mixed group. It was so hot, they joined us the second day.

Did I act irresponsibly or participate in inappropriate behavior?

Well that's a completley different context. However, if you went scantly clad amongst a group of people, especially mixed sexes, I would find that in and of itself irresponsible. But I do not find the wisdom of soaking irresponsible. But with a little effort one could avoid the mixed company and get the benefit of soaking.

MrDanger · Postby **MrDanger** » February 27th, 2006, 9:09 am

Poimen wrote:Well that's a completley different context. However, if you went scantly clad amongst a group of people, especially mixed sexes, I would find that in and of itself irresponsible. But I do not find the wisdom of soaking irresponsible. But with a little effort one could avoid the mixed company and get the benefit of soaking.

Aha, now we are getting some where. Now, exactly, how much clothing am I required to put on to not be acting irresponsible.

MrDanger · Postby **MrDanger** » February 27th, 2006, 9:14 am

Poimen wrote:Fortunantley, the homo scene is not as prominent in rural AL as it seems to be elsewhere.

What are you basing this information on? I work in an area that can be considered as "back woods as the come" to a lot of people. (Steve, would you like to testify to Westmoreland for me?

)

I had heard from students that we had started having problems in that area over the last few years, but it wasn't known by most yet. This year, little signs of it have started popping up. I am finding it is a growing trend in almost all areas of the U.S. Still, most of the teachers in our school are ignorant of most of the signals they are sending.

I would guarantee you it is going on in your area, you just have to dig deep enough in the youth culture to find it. They hide it very well.

Poimen · Postby **Poimen** » February 27th, 2006, 9:17 am

You are probably right. I mean it is not openly practiced around here like it is in some AL cities.

Poimen · Postby **Poimen** » February 27th, 2006, 9:22 am

MrDanger wrote:
Poimen wrote:Well that's a completley different context. However, if you went scantly clad amongst a group of people, especially mixed sexes, I would find that in and of itself irresponsible. But I do not find the wisdom of soaking irresponsible. But with a little effort one could avoid the mixed company and get the benefit of soaking.

Aha, now we are getting some where. Now, exactly, how much clothing am I required to put on to not be acting irresponsible.

Poimen wrote:No -- I'm not an ankles and wrist to chin kinda person. But, I do feel like the scripture speaks enough generally on nakedness, and various parts of the body being identified sexually, to let us know that thighs, bellies, and breasts are or should be "private" areas.

so basically shoulders to knees as a minimum.

MrDanger · Postby **MrDanger** » February 27th, 2006, 9:38 am

Poimen wrote:
Poimen wrote:No -- I'm not an ankles and wrist to chin kinda person. But, I do feel like the scripture speaks enough generally on nakedness, and various parts of the body being identified sexually, to let us know that thighs, bellies, and breasts are or should be "private" areas.

so basically shoulders to knees as a minimum.

So, if I want to wear a muscle shirt/sleeveless shirt (or in my case, muscleless shirt), over my long shorts, that is still a no no?

Poimen · Postby **Poimen** » February 27th, 2006, 9:50 am

Possibly a fashion No-No. :twisted:

But so long as the shirt decently covers you (and isn't stetched and cut like something Stryper would wear, when they opt to actually wear shirts that is) It woud seem to cover the basic areas identified as private to me.

Steve · Postby **Steve** » February 27th, 2006, 10:41 am

OK, a couple of points.

1) I can't IMAGINE a more backwoods area than Westmoreland.

2) Those of you who are defending public bathing, GO DO IT! You seem to be setting traps for those of us who have chosen, because of personal conviction, not to do it. "Well just how much clothing IS enough? What about wearing a T-Shirt? A LONG sleeved T-shirt?" You seem to be wanting us to "set a standard" (or 29) that isn't directly addressed in scripture and then cry foul!

The bible doesn't give specifics in many areas, only general guidelines. That is why we fell so flat on our face for so many years! You can't say EVERYONE must do A, B and C but NOT D, E and F in order to be "right"! The bible speaks about it in the eating meat issue. Some are convicted about it, some are not. Should one offend the other because of it? NO! Call me a "weak Christian" about this issue if you want, but it is my belief about this right now.

I didn't put on a ring for a LONG time after the changes were made, but I have one on now. I may ORGANIZE a "Christian Swim" at some point, but I highly doubt it. If you are so comfortable with this issue, why are you so concerned that I am not? What threatens you about my hesitation? It is only an opinion.

I am a deacon in my church. If I was asked about it happening at Arrowhead (don't you DARE, Robby! :lol:

) I would respond the same as I have here, and would show scripture to back up my position. I still have not seen scripture to back up the positon of those who are for it, nor do I need to, really. I think it is a cultural difference, and it doesn't matter as long as parents are allowed to make the final decision.

Some folks still won't go to movies at all. Are they HURT by that? No. Some go sometimes, like me. Some go all the time. It is a lifestyle choice based on whatever the individual is convicted about. Should I conceed that I should go to a movie every week or condone what you watch just because you like to go? I don't think so.

Enough from me already....(and they all said.....)

MrDanger · Postby **MrDanger** » February 27th, 2006, 10:54 am

Steve wrote:The bible doesn't give specifics in many areas, only general guidelines. That is why we fell so flat on our face for so many years! You can't say EVERYONE must do A, B and C but NOT D, E and F in order to be "right"! The bible speaks about it in the eating meat issue. Some are convicted about it, some are not. Should one offend the other because of it? NO! Call me a "weak Christian" about this issue if you want, but it is my belief about this right now.

...and that is my point Steve. You can't legislate holiness. The exact length of sleeve can't be found in Habakkuk (I know, I just looked). I am agreeing whith you that it comes down to personal conviction. I thought that was understood from part of my posts earlier. However, no offense Poimen, today, I read that I am "irresponsilbe". Nope, that doesn't cut it for me. If someone wants to legislate holiness, please give me the specifics (inches of sleeves and all) so then I can become a responsible christian.

Pastor Bill · Postby **Pastor Bill** » February 27th, 2006, 10:59 am

OK Poimen, so you are not against mixed swimming, you are against some of the swimming attire (or most modern swimming attire). I can see that, don't completely agree, but it's understandable.

So is this more about what they show, or what they see? If they dress appropriately could they go? or would the whole group have to dress by certain standards?

If it's about what they see, then how do you shield them from skin everywhere else?

Kenya · Postby **Kenya** » February 27th, 2006, 10:59 am

MrDanger wrote:
Steve wrote:The bible doesn't give specifics in many areas, only general guidelines. That is why we fell so flat on our face for so many years! You can't say EVERYONE must do A, B and C but NOT D, E and F in order to be "right"! The bible speaks about it in the eating meat issue. Some are convicted about it, some are not. Should one offend the other because of it? NO! Call me a "weak Christian" about this issue if you want, but it is my belief about this right now.

...and that is my point Steve. You can't legislate holiness. The exact length of sleeve can't be found in Habakkuk (I know, I just looked). I am agreeing whith you that it comes down to personal conviction. I thought that was understood from part of my posts earlier. However, no offense Poimen, today, I read that I am "irresponsilbe". Nope, that doesn't cut it for me. If someone wants to legislate holiness, please give me the specifics (inches of sleeves and all) so then I can become a responsible christian.

I agree Jeff. It was the "irresponsible" comment that rubbed me the wrong way too.

Jude 2