|
Forums118
Topics9,199
Posts195,600
Members1,323
| |
Most Online5,850
Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
6 registered members (Karen Y, dedication, ProdigalOne, Kevin H, Daryl, 1 invisible),
2,944
guests, and 18
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One
[Re: Tammy Roesch]
#89666
06/08/07 02:42 PM
06/08/07 02:42 PM
|
Active Member 2011
3500+ Member
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,965
Sweden
|
|
I think you are adding the part about "the dangerous UV rays in the summer". I only see where she says that the long sleeves protects from "chilling", which would imply winter and cold weather. So it is the letter of her instruction that is important, no matter what the principal behind it might be? Interesting. Of course not...but in ALL the quotes I could find, not ONE of them mention dressing the limbs because of HEAT...rather it is the opposite...it is because of the COLD... We should adhere to the principle, not twist the principle... And if Ellen had lived in a time when people where aware that such a thing as UV light existed, would she then have mentioned it?
Galatians 2
21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
It is so hazardous to take here a little and there a little. If you put the right little's together you can make the bible teach anything you wish. //Graham Maxwell
|
|
|
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One
[Re: Mountain Man]
#89669
06/08/07 03:01 PM
06/08/07 03:01 PM
|
|
|
Neither the world, nor catholicism, nor protestantism, nor the SDA church believes women wearing modest pants (not tight nor revealing) is sinful or immodest. Yes, there are people who believe it is sinful and immodest, and among them the details vary greatly. Some believe women should be loosely clothed at all times while in public from wrist to ankle to neck. There are those who believe short sleeves are acceptable in hot weather but long dresses over pants is required to maintain modesty. Still others believe it is not necessary to wear pants under long dresses. Then there are those who believe long shorts and short sleeves are modest. And finally some people believe bikinis are acceptable.
Who is right?
Tammy believes people are liberal and sinful if they do not agree with her application of dress reform. She is convinced it is perfectly acceptable for women to wear short sleeves and long dresses over pants in hot weather. Protection against UV rays is not an issue. Any deviation from her strict application is considered sinful. Is she right? MM, you are twisting what I have said and putting words in my mouth that I never said. Where did I say women should wear long dresses over pants in hot weather????? Protection against UV rays is not THE issue that EGW was commenting on. I don't really care what "the world, nor Catholicism, nor Protestantism, nor the SDA church" think, when it comes to modesty...I only care what God thinks. I don't like discussions with those who have an attitude like you do, so please excuse me from further conversation with you.
Christ is waiting with longing desire for the manifestation of Himself in His church. When the character of Christ shall be perfectly reproduced in His people, then He will come to claim them as His own. {COL 69}
|
|
|
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One
[Re: vastergotland]
#89671
06/08/07 03:06 PM
06/08/07 03:06 PM
|
|
|
I think you are adding the part about "the dangerous UV rays in the summer". I only see where she says that the long sleeves protects from "chilling", which would imply winter and cold weather. So it is the letter of her instruction that is important, no matter what the principal behind it might be? Interesting. Of course not...but in ALL the quotes I could find, not ONE of them mention dressing the limbs because of HEAT...rather it is the opposite...it is because of the COLD... We should adhere to the principle, not twist the principle... And if Ellen had lived in a time when people where aware that such a thing as UV light existed, would she then have mentioned it? I don't know...I doubt there was near the problem in her day as in our day, because there were not near as many people exposing so much of their body to the sun. Even the world was a whole lot more modest. Imagine what the beach looked like in her day, compared to our day?
Christ is waiting with longing desire for the manifestation of Himself in His church. When the character of Christ shall be perfectly reproduced in His people, then He will come to claim them as His own. {COL 69}
|
|
|
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One
[Re: Tammy Roesch]
#89681
06/08/07 07:21 PM
06/08/07 07:21 PM
|
SDA
Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,583
California, USA
|
|
Did women wear short sleeves back then?
By God's grace,
Arnold
There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. RH 12/20/1892
|
|
|
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One
[Re: asygo]
#89694
06/09/07 12:02 AM
06/09/07 12:02 AM
|
Charter Member
SDA
Active Member 2020
Senior Member
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 719
East Coast Canada
|
|
maybe it is time for full face coverings and to the ankle dresses.
-This is cracked! What is with us???
-Modesty in USA/CANADA can mean many different things to many different people!! This is a waste of time debating what we are to wear or not wear...I am just so thankful that He looks upon the HEART and not on the Hem Line!
|
|
|
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One
[Re: asygo]
#89695
06/09/07 12:02 AM
06/09/07 12:02 AM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
TR: Where did I say women should wear long dresses over pants in hot weather?????
MM: I beg your pardon, I assumed you agreed with the SOP on wearing long dresses over pants year round. My mistake. Do you believe hot weather warrants wearing long dresses without pants? If so, please post inspired statements to support your view. Thank you.
|
|
|
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One
[Re: asygo]
#89709
06/09/07 10:43 AM
06/09/07 10:43 AM
|
|
|
Did women wear short sleeves back then? You know, Arnold, I have never seen a picture of women back then with short sleeves...but...there is so much counsel about covering the limbs for protection from the cold and chilliness, that it makes me wonder, "Why would there have been the need for all this counsel if the women were wearing long sleeves?" And I did post that quote about a book that EGW read as a child that had a picture of a little girl with short sleeves...so if they made clothes for children with short sleeves, I would imagine they also made adult clothes with short sleeves. But, that is all speculation, as I really don't know. Do you know? 
Christ is waiting with longing desire for the manifestation of Himself in His church. When the character of Christ shall be perfectly reproduced in His people, then He will come to claim them as His own. {COL 69}
|
|
|
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One
[Re: D R]
#89710
06/09/07 10:49 AM
06/09/07 10:49 AM
|
|
|
maybe it is time for full face coverings and to the ankle dresses.
-This is cracked! What is with us???
-Modesty in USA/CANADA can mean many different things to many different people!! This is a waste of time debating what we are to wear or not wear...I am just so thankful that He looks upon the HEART and not on the Hem Line!
It is true, that God looks on the heart, but are you aware that The outside appearance is an index to the heart.--1T 136 (1856).
Christ is waiting with longing desire for the manifestation of Himself in His church. When the character of Christ shall be perfectly reproduced in His people, then He will come to claim them as His own. {COL 69}
|
|
|
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One
[Re: Tammy Roesch]
#89714
06/09/07 08:45 PM
06/09/07 08:45 PM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
TR: But, that is all speculation, as I really don't know.
MM: Tammy, you can ignore me, but we cannot ignore your theology based on speculation. You seem like a staunch and strict advocate of the old ways, the truth, and yet you have no problem, when it suits your taste, doing whatever makes sense to you. In spite of the fact you do not have inspired support for your version of dress reform (i.e., short sleeves during hot weather, dresses without pants) you go out on a limb. I don't get it?
|
|
|
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One
[Re: Mountain Man]
#89724
06/09/07 11:20 PM
06/09/07 11:20 PM
|
|
|
Here is a clear quote in relation to the dress reform, which also speaks about the pants part of this reform dress:
The Reform Dress.--The reform dress, which was once advocated, [THE "REFORM DRESS" ADVOCATED AND ADOPTED IN THE 1860'S WAS DESIGNED BY A GROUP OF SDA WOMEN IN AN ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE A HEALTHFUL, MODEST, COMFORTABLE, AND NEAT ATTIRE IN HARMONY WITH THE LIGHT GIVEN ELLEN WHITE, WHICH WAS MUCH NEEDED AT THE TIME. SEE PP. 252-255. IT CALLED FOR LOOSE-FITTING GARMENTS HUNG FROM THE SHOULDERS WITH A HEMLINE ABOUT NINE INCHES FROM THE FLOOR. THE LOWER LIMBS WERE CLOTHED WITH A TROUSERLIKE GARMENT PROVIDING COMFORT AND WARMTH. SEE STORY OF OUR HEALTH MESSAGE, PP. 112-130.--COMPILERS.] proved a battle at every step. Members of the church, refusing to adopt this healthful style of dress, caused dissension and discord. With some there was no uniformity and taste in the preparation of the dress as it had been plainly set before them. This was food for talk. The result was that the objectionable features, the pants, were left off. The burden of advocating the reform dress was removed because that which was given as a blessing was turned into a curse. {3SM 253.2}
It seems like there was quite a stir over the wearing of the pants part of the reform dress back then. There definitely isn't such a stir about this today!
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
