by Robin W. Haley
(listen to a lesson on modesty)

I am indeed grateful to the elders of this fine congregation for the kind invitation to this series of lectures, and to prepare this manuscript for the well-known series of Bellview Lectureship books. I am thankful that these brethren have seen fit to invite brother Michael Hatcher and his family to work with them at Pensacola, and for their foresight to continue to prepare for and conduct this Lectureship. My prayer will continue to be that they may never cease "holding forth the word of life" in this manner.

Introduction

To any and all who have any degree of discernment it is painfully obvious that our nation, yea the world, has the on-going and growing problem of those who seem not to know nor care about what is decent and proper in the moral realm of virtue and modesty. It is therefore again timely that such a lesson on modesty be forthcoming. Some may feel that such teaching and reminding of brethren of these things is like "beating a dead horse", but I am glad that there are still those who have the attitude of the apostle Peter who wrote, "Wherefore I shall be ready always to put you in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and are established in the truth which is with you. And I think it right, as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by putting you in remembrance" (2 Peter 1:12-13). 

What disappoints this writer are the questions that Christians (who ought to know better) ask such as "Well, what is modest? What does society say? Did God ever tell us 'how long is long'?" It is my observation that the majority of those who ask such questions are those who are bent on trying to justify their behavior and dress code which their common sense is really trying to tell them is contrary to God's standards. So long as Christians still ask such questions, it will continue to be necessary for us to address and teach what God says about these things. 

WHAT BRETHREN OUGHT TO KNOW

When we speak of modesty, we speak of that which is moral, of virtue and integrity. Generally speaking, we mean behavior and dress which speaks of an attitude of meekness, shyness and goodness before God and men. Modesty in financial matters has reference to that which is not extravagant. In behavior, it refers to not being boisterous, extroverted to the point of being unbecoming, unseemly or odious. In dress, we refer to clothing which does not draw undo attention to oneself, especially to private, intimate parts of one's body. Immodest dress does not just mean various degrees of undress, but also any kind of clothing which draws attention to body parts...to the point of causing impure thoughts in the minds of others. This is where some people will say, "Well, we can't help what some people think!" To some degree, this is true. But we certainly ought to recognize that we contribute to what people think, and we do that many times by means of our appearance. Simply put, clothes that are too tight, too low-cut, too highly-hemmed or too thin are immodest.

Brethren ought to know how some of our country-men are seen abroad. Having traveled much in Eastern Europe and twice to India, I have seen and heard how these people refer to Americans. Read carefully this notice I clipped from a newspaper from Trivandrum, India (1988):

"Where Scanty Clothing Poses Problems Aplenty"

"The advice is given (due to recent indecent activities at a beach resort) to dress properly. Nothing of this kind (referring to attempted rape of American and English girls) would happen again if the tourists followed the dress instructions from the tourism department. All that the department would like is to see them covered with an appropriate apparel...."

This comes from a society which finds most of its children going naked, and many of the old people go naked, or nearly so. Keep in mind also, this was referring to apparel at a beach for swimming. Can anyone conclude that these swim suits were "appropriate?" 

Brethren ought to know that their clothing speaks to everyone around them. The world would call this making a "fashion statement." Brother, sister, your clothes are professing something about you. It is sad that Christians who are to be the light to this world would rebel at the following "dress code" if a congregation's elders imposed it on members when they come to worship and Bible class:

"Men must wear dress shirts, ties, dress slack and dress shoes. Jeans are not allowed. Tennis shoes are not acceptable. Shirts with writing and cartoons are not approved. Hair styles must be neat, trim and clean. Women are required to wear dresses, skirts and blouses and all must be conservative in style. Strapless or spaghetti strap dresses and bare mid-drifts are not acceptable. Dress shoes and hosiery are required. Tennis shoes are not acceptable. Jeans are not allowed. Shirts with writing and cartoons are inappropriate. Hair styles must be neat, trim and clean."

Perhaps you have seen this is some brethren's bulletins. It is the dress code for Sears! Seems the business world has more regard for the influence of its employees than many Christians have for their influence toward the world. Why will some brethren allow the world to influence them for the devil rather than try to influence the world for righteousness? People are influenced by how we dress! If this were not true, please explain why the ragged, unkempt, unshaved street urchin (having been arrested for some crime), is counseled by his lawyer to clean himself up, shave and put on clean, conservative clothing before coming before the judge and/or jury? Clothing speaks. Consider the use of kinds of clothes to describe certain people: "And she arose, and went away, and put off her veil from her, and put on THE GARMENTS OF HER WIDOWHOOD" (Genesis 38:19). Again, "And, behold, there met him a woman WITH THE ATTIRE OF A HARLOT, and wily of heart" (Proverbs 7:10). 

Brethren ought to know that there are kinds of clothing that are appropriate in some places and situations, but not in others. What one wears to bed is not likely to be fitting for the picnic grounds. What one would wear to play some ball with the kids is probably not proper for the worship assembly. Some have opted to compromise with the world's standard of decency by wearing sweat clothes for nearly any and every occasion. Last year, the wife of a local preacher attended Monday or Tuesday night of our Gospel Meeting dressed in a violet-colored sweat suit! I still cannot figure why Christians will dress "appropriately" with a suit, tie, nice clean shoes, and conservative, respectful dresses when attending the memorial service of a friend or loved one who has passed from this life, but "dress down" in jeans, tennis shoes and flannel shirts or T-shirts for the memorial of our Lord's death on the first day of the week. 

Brethren ought to know that our word gymnasium comes from the Greek word gumnos which means "naked." In ancient times, those participating in sporting, athletic events, such as the Olympics, did so nude or partially so. It is not sinful to go to the gym, but one MUST be cautious what one wears and how one dresses there. Just because it is acceptable to wear short, tight clothing at the gym does not mean that God approves of us wearing it...at the gym or anywhere else! 

We have been living in a time where much emphasis has been put on the physique and exercise and being "in shape." We know what Paul said of this matter, "for bodily exercise is profitable for a little" (1 Timothy 4:8). Yet, some seem to think exercise is the panacea for all ills...physical, emotional and social. The clothing donned by those who have fallen for this line is atrocious and most immodest. Last summer, I helped host a volley-ball and ice cream get together for the young people of the congregation where I labor. One young man, who had obviously been doing a good deal of weight lifting, showed up with very tight short-shorts and a skin tight muscle shirt. Very little was left to anyone's imagination as to his "manhood," and his upper torso physique. Embarrassing is an understatement for his appearance. But, the world would see his clothing as "appropriate" for the occasion. The Lord did not! 

Sadly, too many have concluded that when engaged in a sport, there is no immodesty when one dresses in the outfit that someone has deemed as "the" outfit to be worn for that sport. There is nothing sinful about swimming. But what one wears to swim, where one swims and with whom one swims are indeed matters of modesty. When engaged in with those undressed, of the opposite sex and in public or private settings, it is a sinful situation. Some may have a real talent at swimming/diving. But the dress demanded by the sport to participate ought to convince Christians that it would be immodest, thus inappropriate. What is wrong with basketball? Nothing of itself. But where do Christians get the idea that they may dress in some of the abbreviated clothing as is typical for the sport and be pleasing to God? 

Worst of all, it seems, are those who try to justify their daughters' being involved in cheer-leading when they flip and flaunt "all they have" before the eyes of the fans in the stands. How much "leg" does the Lord think is appropriate for others to see? He, being the author of modesty, ought to be able to tell us. This He does in several places. Yes, He tells us "how long is long." Here is an example: "Take the millstones, and grind meal: uncover thy locks, make bare the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers. Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen" (Isaiah 47:2-3, KJV). Is it not obvious what God calls "nakedness" and "shame" here? The uncovering of the leg and thigh are regarded as nakedness and shame. Why else do people pay attention to the cheer leaders? Have you ever seen male cheer leaders? I have. You know that they are not dressed as the girls. Why? Men are not exempt from God's standard of modesty and dress. It is just as sinful for a man to be showing his legs and thighs (his nakedness and shame) as it is for a woman. 

I watched a movie the other night where a swim party was being given at a celebrities' house. There was a band playing. The men were all dressed in slacks and shirts. Guess how the girls were dressed? They were not! They were all in skimpy swim suits. I like to watch Star Trek. You know what I have noticed? The male members of the crew on the Starship Enterprise all wear long pants and long sleeved shirts. Guess what the women wear? The shortest of tutus and short sleeves is typical uniform for those gals. Why? This clothing certainly does not fit the definitions of modesty and virtue. By definition, these traits mean "to observe proprieties of sex; chaste; descent and unassuming; moral and pure." 

Brethren ought to know that our society is bent on changing the definitions and roles of its male/female members. Many of the devil's "-isms" (feminism being perhaps the leading influence) are being used to dupe us into believing that men and women are just alike...only different! By this, I mean that roles are being obscured and obliterated. Men are no longer men...women are no longer women. There are "alternatives" being explored. Such goop as "men ought to be strong enough to be maternal" and "women ought to be willing to stand up and take it like a man" is being injected into the thinking, entertainment and schooling of our entire population! How does the subject of modesty enter? Just so: when the lines between masculinity and femininity are erased, women are no longer encouraged to be modest (having concern for shamefacedness; blushing). Women are being encouraged to act like men in about every unnatural way imaginable. They are encouraged to ogle the male body as crude men would ogle a girly magazine. 

More than ever before perhaps, is it important for men to guard their modesty. Some may object by saying, "Oh, women are not attracted to men's bodies." This is not what my wife says. They are being encouraged to be so attracted. Consider: why are there such things as "ladies' night only" at bars? Why are there such things as "male strippers?" (Add to this the gross explosion of homosexuals who have "come out of the closet" and the increase of homosexuality and male rape. Why are young boys being approached by homosexuals in record numbers these days? Part of the problem is a lack of any kind of rule for male modesty.)  With such loss of femininity there is the loss of respect for women. As one good sister has observed, when women walk, talk, dress and act like men, they are treated less and less like ladies. When a woman acts, dresses, and speaks like a lady, she will be treated as such. 

WHAT SAITH THE SCRIPTURES?

The whole point of this manuscript and these lectures is to learn and/or remind the auditors and readers of this material what God has said about these things. Do the Scriptures address these things specifically? Are there Biblical guidelines that we can use to determine what kind of clothes to wear and how long they must be or short they may be? YES! The Scriptures do give us these answers. Many may not like to hear the answers, but as Paul would say, "Let God be found true, but every man a liar" (Rom.3:4). 

Some Pertinent Old Testament Passages Let us now investigate some passages wherein these things are addressed, either directly or indirectly. It is appropriate for us to go to the beginning of man's problem with his nakedness, thus, we shall look first into Genesis. In the third chapter we are told of the introduction of sin into this world, the blame that was passed and the record of the beginning of God's remedy for this sin. We read, 

"And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig-leaves together, and made themselves aprons (Genesis 3:7)...And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself (Genesis 3:10)...And Jehovah God made for Adam and for his wife coats of skins, and clothed them" (Genesis 3:21). 

Note that Adam and Eve knew they were naked and needed covering. This covering or "apron" was a loincloth, like a belt or sash. By the description, it seems to have covered more than many bikini bottoms. But then we see that, although they had already covered themselves, they still considered themselves naked, thus they hid from God. This situation is then contrasted with what God provided for them, namely: "coats of skins." These "coats" were like robes that hung from the shoulder and covered the body, past the thigh and to the calf. What did God do with these coats? He "clothed" the man and his wife. This Hebrew word means "to wrap around; to put on a garment." This then is what God would call being "clothed." Anything less is classed by this text as "naked." God has set the standard for being clothed and covered, not Mary Quant (inventor of the mini clothing rage). It ought to be clear that tube tops, halter tops, spaghetti strapped garments, shoulderless gowns (of any kind), low slung muscle shirts, shorts and mini-anythings are not proper "clothing" and therefore not modest. 

Next, consider the instruction given to the priests of the Old Testament. They were not to allow their lower parts to show. They were to be covered, even to the point of wearing "underclothing" so that none could see their lower legs, thighs, etc. This was considered by God to be their "nakedness." (See Exodus28:42; 39:28; Leviticus 6:10; 16:4). In the Law we read, "Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar, that thy nakedness be not uncovered thereon" (Exodus 20:26). From what we learned earlier, God did not want people to see His priests' legs and thighs (their nakedness).

We know that much of what we find in these Old Testament things are foreshadows and types of what God will accomplish in Christ and His church. The priesthood answers to the priesthood of believers today. Obviously, God wants His priests to be clothed and their nakedness covered. Let us never forget who we are in the sight of God: 

"ye also, as living stones, are built up a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through Jesus Christ (1 Peter 2:5)...But ye are a elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, that ye may show forth the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light" (1 Peter 2:9). 

Another area of modesty that I myself have not seen nor heard addressed to much degree is that of cosmetics. Take note of the unsavory description of Jezebel, "And when Jehu was come to Jezreel, Jezebel heard of it; and she painted her eyes (face, KJV)" (2 Kings 9:30). It seems that any woman would desire to stay away from anything that would tend to align her with a woman such as was Jezebel. 

Our word for cosmetics is from the Greek word kosmos which has reference to "an orderly arrangement; decoration; adorning; pertaining to the world." This would obviously be an outward adorning. Remember that Peter instructed women not to be so concerned about outward adorning, but rather the inward adorning of a meek and quiet spirit (1 Peter 3:4). 

A related word in Greek is kosmios which means "decorous; modest (with respect to degree or amount) and well-arranged." The use of cosmetics is not sinful, but the overuse of them is worldly. Sisters, please refrain from "painting" yourself as did wicked Jezebel. Remember the words of the wise man, "Grace is deceitful, and beauty is vain; But a woman that feareth Jehovah, she shall be praised" (Proverbs 31:30). 

Again, from the Proverbs we find this gem, "A worthy (virtuous, KJV) woman who can find? For her price is far above rubies" (Proverbs 31:10). This virtue or worthiness is defined as "a force, whether of men or women; to be of substance; valor, virtue, worthy." Its Greek counterpart means "moral power, strength." This describes a person, male or female, who has the character of substance and power to stand against the pressures of society when it comes to morals and modesty. The opposite of this trait is found in the attitude of God's people as addressed by Jeremiah, "Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush" (Jeremiah 6:15). Two words which need our attention are "ashamed" and "blush." To be ashamed means "to pale (with insignificance); to fall into disgrace through failure." This "blushing" is associated with the disgrace and shame mentioned above due to any public exposure and humiliation. We can be ashamed at certain behavior. But when the actions becomes known (public), we blush and are embarrassed. Many of our brethren ought to be ashamed of themselves and how they dress, whether for the world or worship. When in public, they ought to be embarrassed and blush!

Some Pertinent New Testament Passages Next we look into the New Testament. We find an interesting contrast between being naked and being clothed in this account from the Gospel of Luke, 

"And when he was come forth upon the land, there met him a certain man out of the city, who had demons; and for a long time he had worn no clothes, and abode not in any house, but in the tombs (Luke 8:27)...And they went out to see what had come to pass; and they came to Jesus, and found the man, from whom the demons were gone out, sitting, clothed and in his right mind, at the feet of Jesus: and they were afraid" (Luke 8:35). 

What was the result of this man's being put into his right mind? He was clothed! Right-thinking people will not go about without proper clothing. We are to be different from the world. Let us be "an ensample to them that believe (of the believers, KJV)" (1 Timothy 4:12). We ought not to be "fashioned according to this world: but be ye transformed" (Romans 12:2), because we are "in Christ, and thus a new creature" (2 Corinthians 5:17). 

One of the three most quoted passages on this subject of modesty is Galatians chapter five. Let us emphasize two words in particular from the following, "Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness" (Galatians 5:19). "Uncleanness" is the state of being morally impure. This would include actions which are "of a doubtful nature; passive lewdness; immodesty, typified by abbreviated clothing." Thus, shorts and the attire used for swimming (when both sexes are present) are immodest and considered "unclean." This is precisely what caused David and Bathsheba's trouble: passive lewdness which erupted into fornication and adultery. 

"Lasciviousness" is seen as "being incontinent (promiscuous); licentiousness; wantonness." This is "active lewdness; immoral excess; unchecked lust; dancing and petting." The opposite of these kinds of actions and attitudes would be seen as life in the Spirit (Gal.5:16,25). Notice how the attributes of a lawful Christian life contradict the passive/active lewdness of a sinful life: "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control; against such there is no law" (Gal. 5:22-23). "Goodness" is that quality of "integrity, virtue and beneficence." "Self-control" ought to be self explanatory. It means "to be temperate; in control of or mastering emotions, appetites and passions." We are not to "love the world" (1 John 2:15), nor are we to "fashioning yourselves according to your former lusts" (1 Peter 1:14). Let us "abstain from fleshly lust, which war against the soul" (1 Peter 2:11), and "reckon ye also yourselves to be dead unto sin, but alive unto God in Christ Jesus" (Romans 6:11). 

There are deadly consequences in giving oneself to the works of the flesh such as those of uncleanness and lasciviousness: we will not inherit the kingdom of God (Gal.5:21)! In Galatians chapter six and verse eight we learn that we shall reap corruption if we give ourselves to the flesh. We ought rather to be determined to live in such a way "That the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work" (2 Timothy 3:17), and being "good minister(s) of Christ Jesus, nourished in the words of the faith, and of the good doctrine" (1 Timothy 4:6). If we live this way, paying close attention to God's standards of modesty in our speech, actions and dress, we "may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in that world by lust" (2 Peter 1:4). The second most quoted passage referring to modesty is in my judgment First Timothy chapter two. Here is the passage: 

"In like manner, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefastness and sobriety; not with braided hair, and gold or pearls or costly raiment; but (which becometh women professing godliness) through good works" (1 Timothy 2:9-10). 

There are five words we must consider in this text. To "adorn" means "to put in proper order; to decorate or trim as with garments." This clothing is to be "modest" which means "appropriate and seemly to proper behavior." It seems that dressing for one occasion may not be the "modest" thing to wear for another occasion. As we noted earlier, dressing for a picnic is not "modest" apparel for worship, though the body may be covered modestly.

The next two words to be high-lighted deal with attitudes. "Shamefastness" is not necessarily being ashamed (worthy of blame, embarrassment, or humiliation) of something. Our English word "ashamed" carries with it the meaning of being guilty of something for which we ought to be punished. Elsewhere it is translated "reverence" (Heb.12:28). Just the opposite ought to be felt by those who so dress. They ought to feel content in the knowledge that they are presenting themselves in a decent fashion. Rather, it means "to be bashful (towards men or God); to show reverence and awe." Some clothing shows very little respect and reverence for God. When Christians dress like they were going to Saturday afternoon bowling, but arrive at worship, are they really showing the proper reverence and awe for God as this word describes? We think not! This word describes the person who would restrain himself from unworthy actions; it is that attitude which would precede and thus prevent shameful acts. It is never worth anything to act or dress disrespectfully...before men or God. 

"Sobriety" is that character of "self-control of one's mind; sanity and soberness." When coupled with the preceding "shamefastness" or "shamefacedness" we find a person who has strong control of their will, in that they will not be unduly influenced by the world, and will choose to put their respect for God above all else. Many brethren may say otherwise, but their real attitude shows in their actions and appearance. 

Finally, this kind of clothing and attitude "professes" something. As we before stated, our clothing speaks! This word "professing" means "to engage to do something." It refers to "something promising to be what it actually appears." When Paul used this word, he used it in its middle voice. Thus, our clothing is speaking of ourselves and what we think of and feel toward ourselves. What are we to be "professing?" Godliness! This word refers to how "devout or devoted" we are to God. 

Though much of what Paul teaches here deals with character, it is not merely incidental that clothing helps make up this character. Clothing, like the qualities of our character, is to be regulated in order to present us as godly individuals. Character alone does not exhibit modesty...modesty alone does not build character. Excess is to be avoided as well as any degree of undress which would arouse lust in another. Such excesses would include those of outward decoration, makeup, jewelry and clothing which is out of place for the occasion, keeping in mind that some occasion (events) are not fit to be engaged in anyway (i.e., swimming parties, dances, etc.). 

The third passage with which we must deal on this topic is 1 Peter 3:2-4. The apostle wrote thus, 

"In like manner, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, even if any obey not the word, they may without the word be gained by the behavior of their wives; beholding your chaste behavior coupled with fear. Whose adorning let it not be the outward adorning of braiding the hair, and of wearing jewels of gold, or of putting on apparel; but let it be the hidden man of the heart, in the incorruptible apparel of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price." 

The Holy Spirit wants us to know that "chaste" behavior is that which is "proper, clean, i.e. (figuratively) innocent, modest, perfect: -chaste, clean, pure." Interestingly, this word is related to a Greek term hagios which is the word from which we get "holy." 

What some confuse with merely putting on a ring is the definition of "wearing jewels of gold." Some denominations have concluded that their women are not to wear wedding rings, while their men may do so. God is not so inconsistent. This "wearing" means "a putting all around, i.e. decorating oneself with." Please note that Peter does not say that one ought not to wear a ring, but speaks to those who would decorate themselves like we might decorate a Christmas tree, with tiaras on the head and rings on each finger...sometimes more than one per finger. Some want to contend that the Lord is instructing us that these outward decorations are not to be the only kind of decor, but to also add the chaste, meek and quiet spirit. I disagree with this assessment. The conjunction used in the grammar is the word "but" which would put the chaste, meek and quiet spirit in contrast with the "outward adorning." "Meekness" is synonymous with "humility" in this case. A humble person will not draw attention to themselves with their outward decoration...their "loud" clothing. "Quiet" has reference to "keeping one's seat or place; sedentary; still." How can any imagine that this can be accomplished while being decorated all about with gold and pearls and fancy clothing not suited to the occasion. 

What Have We Learned?

Why brethren will argue with clear conclusions of what the Scriptures reveal is beyond this writer. God knows their hearts. I try not to judge the motives of men, but I certainly cannot help but judge the fruits of their actions. Yea, we all must do so. Those who contend that God has allowed us to draw the lines of modesty based upon what society says at any given "season," is foolish to say the least. They have failed to really and truly rightly divide the Word of Truth to learn what God really says about this subject. 

It seems inescapable that God has set before us a guideline which gives a certain degree of being clothed and covered. Within that guideline, He has set certain limits. Within those limits, He has established precedents to be followed which will lend themselves to any time, place, culture and occasion. 

God wants us to be covered, from our shoulders to our calves. To expose the upper leg and thigh is to expose our nakedness. This kind of covering is to express our mind-set which is a willingness to be and show forth our godliness. Though we may be covered in a decent way for one occasion, such dress may not show the proper respect for God in another occasion. Let us use our common sense and be willing to be instructed in these matters. Let us announce to the Lord and our brethren our intentions when we come into the assembly to worship. Let us show the world that we refuse to join in their "party" if "nakedness" is required. 

Finally, let us not fall for the world's attempts to erase the differences between that which is masculine and that which is feminine. Let our men be, act and look like men, treating women as ladies...whether they want to be so treated or not! Let our women look, act, and behave as ladies. Let us all show forth the excellencies of Him who called out of darkness into His marvelous light (1 Pet.2:9) by our dress and demeanor.