"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 in spite of 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 women 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 in spite of 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 which 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
passions 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 heart 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 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 with reference to 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 which
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 which 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 which we have mentioned are obviously and
flagrantly a violation of the purpose of God in clothing you, that there should
not be a question as to if 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 to 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 get 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 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 half-way 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 here.
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 of excuse for leaving two or three buttons
open. If a woman can leave here 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 in fact 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, you underarms, and the parts
of your chest and of your back which immediately adjoin them, are very
attractive to a man; and these are the parts that a sleeveless blouse display. 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 here 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 which is so sheer that a man may see through it. The
obvious and undeniable design of such clothing is to thwart the purpose of
clothing, and expose your body rather than covering it. When a man sees you dressed
in this, what can he think but that it is your intention 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 which explicitly reveals a
woman's form is as bad as that which reveals her nakedness, such clothing are 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 which 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 the 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 which has divided
churches, families, and friends. The background is this: historically men have
always worn pants, and the 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 has 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 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 which have fought to change Gods 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 of the form which 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 which reside between the woman's waist and your knees.
Men derives 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 which 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 which
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. In spite of 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 the 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, and prostitute it to the gaze of
the whole world, you only glorify yourself and serve the devil.
No comments:
Post a Comment