Dress code in church?

[Gerr]

2 hours ago, pierrepaul said:

I do not see the "dress up" vs "dress down" positions as equivalent. For those who wish to "dress up", they will always be welcome. In my experience, even the most laid-back, casual, "dress down" congregation will accept a man in a suit and tie or a woman in an elegant church dress. If you want to dress up, no one will stop you. There are a couple fellows in our congregation who wear suits and ties every week and no one has ever suggested to them that they ought to dress down. I occasionally dress up and I've never received any comments or "looks" suggestion I ought to take off my tie. OTOH I have been to "dress up" congregations where those in casual attire have received comments or looks.

This personal experience is why I tend to have less sympathy for the "dress up" position, since they are (in my personal experience) mostly not asking for the right to dress up (which they always have) but rather they want to control how other people dress. I have trouble relating to this desire to want to control other people.

There is not one iota in my being that wants to control you or anyone else.   What we are discussing here is how we are to approach our awesome and holy Creator God.  IMHO, He is not our buddy whom we can approach just any which way. How you approach God is your business.  All I'm doing is expressing my understanding as to what Scripture teaches as to how we approach the One whose name is Reverend.

[Gerr]

On 2/20/2017 at 6:29 PM, JoeMo said:

What do you think God appreciates more - a well-dressed hypocrite or a shabbily dressed true believer?

 

Are you saying that being well-dressed and being a true believer are mutually exclusive?  And that true believers will dress shabbily? 

[Gerr]

On 2/19/2017 at 9:04 AM, Green Cochoa said:

Regarding personal appearance, we are also told not to bathe, shave, or braid our hair on Sabbath.  Do Adventists still believe and follow that?  Seems the simpler the better--church is not to be a fashion show.  Let the adornment be of the heart, and not the outward appearance.  If our heart is in the right place, we won't come looking shoddy.

Who said that?  As for me, if I don't shave for a couple of days, no one would probably notice except when I kiss my wife.   Not so with some.  Would anyone deny a dairy farmer a bath on Sabbath after milking his cows early Sabbath morning

and smells like dung?

[Gerr]

On 2/19/2017 at 1:38 PM, GayatfootofCross said:

Well......

I think The Ladies should indeed wear her best to church! But it would be according to mY fine taste and delicate fashionable sensibilities!

Glorious beaded sweeping gowns with arm length gloves (ya know there was a time when no self respecting woman  stepped outside her homes without her lil white gloves with a delicate pearl button on the wrist)

and a matching TaLL head piece.

Modest for sure but tailored nicely.

I think many pleats would have a great effect when one twirls but only with multiple slips and ruffles and bloomers to show not self with impropriety.

Whalebone and cage crinoline and bustles are optional.

 

And now for You Gents!

Of course when sitting and having herbal tea with the  Ladies at potluck, one must show himself as quite dapper.

Tuxes with tails and top hats are all the rage!

It don't have to be black anymore!

But please if one must wear bright colours -a Zoot Suit will be more becoming to enter into The Sanctuary.

And spats! All men must wear spats!

 

 

My best has nothing to do with whether you like it or not!

[Gerr]

On 2/20/2017 at 11:10 AM, Gregory Matthews said:

Standards of dress:

1)  Such are often culturally determined, rather than being absolute dicta that came down from God.

 

 

 

 

 

 

True, nonetheless, there IS the concept of what is and what is not good grooming.  

[JoeMo]

58 minutes ago, Gerry Cabalo said:

Are you saying that being well-dressed and being a true believer are mutually exclusive?  And that true believers will dress shabbily? 

No; I am saying that there is less than 100% correlation between how well one dresses and how committed one is to their Christian walk.  I read somewhere that God does not look at the outside, He looks at the heart ("The Lord does not look at the things people look at. People look at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.” (1Sam. 16:7).  I also read somewhere about discouraging the "saints" from showing preference to wealthier dapper individuals over working class poor, "less dapper" individuals ".If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, “Here’s a good seat for you,” but say to the poor man, “You stand there” or “Sit on the floor by my feet,” (James 2:3).

[pierrepaul]

25 minutes ago, Gerry Cabalo said:

All I'm doing is expressing my understanding as to what Scripture teaches as to how we approach the One whose name is Reverend.

As am I. According to my understanding, we do not approach the One whose name is Reverend when we enter a church building or meeting hall. I believe the Bible teaches that our church buildings and meeting halls are not temples; rather our bodies are the new temple (1 Cor 6:19; John 4:21-23); and that we receive the Holy Spirit in us upon baptism (Acts 2:38). In Hebrews 4:24 "approaching the Throne of Grace" is mentioned, but I believe this is properly understood in the context of the heavenly temple, not a church assembly here on earth. We are "approaching" God continually (or rather God has approached us), whether at work, at play, at home, on the bus, etc. Our church services are not temple services; our pastors, ministers and elders are not priests, and our church services do not consist of us "approaching God" as if God was not with us outside of the church building.

[Green Cochoa]

1 hour ago, Gerry Cabalo said:

Who said that?  As for me, if I don't shave for a couple of days, no one would probably notice except when I kiss my wife.   Not so with some.  Would anyone deny a dairy farmer a bath on Sabbath after milking his cows early Sabbath morning

and smells like dung?

 

1 hour ago, Gerry Cabalo said:

Making a hard fast rule without exceptions is ALWAYS dangerous!  Is there anyone willing to deny bathing for someone who works in a dairy farm who has to milk his cows before church service and smells like  cow dung?

1) Who made the rule?  Hint: It wasn't me.

2) Who, then, in light of number 1, is the one to "deny bathing"?  Again, it's not me.

 

Have you ever milked cows?  You might, if you don't keep a clean barn and/or are careless where you step, get some dung on your boots--but you'll lose that in the swap to your Sabbath shoes.  I've milked cows, and I don't remember anyone commenting that I smelled of dung afterward.  Cows do have a particular smell all their own that has nothing to do with dung--and I would take that "dairy" smell any day over the thick odors of perfume often to be encountered in American churches.

[Green Cochoa]

By the way, Mrs. White owned milking cows too, and yet she is the one who specifies for us that we are to do our bathing before Sabbath.  Perhaps some here would suggest she smelled like dung in church.

[Gregory Matthews]

Probably, in the time in which EGW lived, people did not bathe everyday.

What is the evidence that at the time EGW  wrote her advice, she was personally milking cows, everyday?

 

 

 

 

[Green Cochoa]

2 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Probably, in the time in which EGW lived, people did not bathe everyday.

What is the evidence that at the time EGW  wrote her advice, she was personally milking cows, everyday?

Quote

     We had a large family to cook for, and the ten quarts of milk which our cow gave each day was not sufficient for our family use. At times three extra quarts had to be purchased to give us enough to mix the bread with milk. This was a most extravagant business, and wholly unnecessary. I had this order of things changed, and the testimony of all was that the bread was more appetizing than when mixed with milk.  {TSDF 11.3} 

That one just highlights the fact they were milking a cow daily and using its milk.  In 7MR it was published again, with the following citation: Ms 3, 1897, pp. 4, 5. ("Health Reforms," January 11, 1897.)  The following comes from her diary a year earlier, apparently.

Quote

 I immediately set to work on my garden men who were in need, some of these destitute of daily food. One man with a family of four children came to me and said that they had had nothing but squash to eat for a week. I gave them a cow, for they must have something for their children. We also plowed their land for them, my hired man doing the work. To another family I loaned a cow, that they might have milk for their children. I cannot see such poverty as this without great pain of heart, for I know that there is enough in the world to sustain all if economy were practiced by those who have the means.--Ms 55, 1896, pp. 1, 2. (Diary, Oct. 1, 1896.)

White Estate Washington, D. C. July 15, 1982  {12MR 95.2} 

Evidently as of 1896, Mrs. White's farm had multiple cows, enough to give and to loan to more than one family.  But at this time, Mrs. White was elderly, and with the specific mention of the "hired man" it cannot be quickly assumed that she herself did the milking.  That evidence comes from another statement:

Quote

I drive my own two-horse team, visit the lumber mills and order lumber the workmen require, and go out in search of cows. I have purchased two good cows. . . . Almost everywhere in the colonies they have a strange custom of confining the cows at milking time.  {3MR 406.5}  
     They put her head in a fixture called a bail, then tie up one of her legs to a stake. It is a barbarous practice. I told those of whom I bought my cows that I should do no such thing, but leave the creature free and teach them to stand still. The owner looked at me in astonishment. "You cannot do this, Mrs. White," he said, "They will not stand. No one thinks of doing any other way." "Well," I answered, "I shall give you an example of what can be done." I have not had a rope on a cow's leg, or her head in a bail. . . . We have treated our cows gently and they are perfectly docile.--Letter 42, 1895, pp. 1, 2. (To Dr. J. H. Kellogg, Aug. 28, 1905.)  {3MR 406.6} 

This shows that Mrs. White owned cows for an extended period of time, and even within a decade of her death she was out working with them.  A letter written the same year, 1905, tells of her breaking up the ground and setting out flowers, beginning at 5 a.m.  She was an active lady, and strong, considering her years.

Now, when did she write that bit about taking the baths before Sabbath?  Right in the middle of that period of cow ownership, in 1901!  (The date is not embedded in the text, but the book was published in 1901.)

Quote

     On Friday let the preparation for the Sabbath be completed. See that all the clothing is in readiness and that all the cooking is done. Let the boots be blacked and the baths be taken. It is possible to do this. If you make it a rule you can do it. The Sabbath is not to be given to the repairing of garments, to the cooking of food, to pleasure seeking, or to any other worldly employment. Before the setting of the sun let all secular work be laid aside and all secular papers be put out of sight. Parents, explain your work and its purpose to your children, and let them share in your preparation to keep the Sabbath according to the commandment.  {6T 355.3} 

So, Ellen White significantly made no special exception for farmhands nor dairy workers in allowing them to take their baths upon the Sabbath.

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Green:  In my opinion you have failed to demonstrate that EGW was regularly milking the cows, herself, rather than her hired help doing such.  I will acknowledge that you demonstrate that EGW was in charge of how the cows were treated and milked.  But, doing it herself, no.

Regardless, with all of the discussion about wearing your best cloths when you come to church to meet God:  I can not imagine that anyone coming directly to church, from caring to the cows, would be expected not to bathe.

That      would, not in my mind, be appropriate.

 

 

 

[Green Cochoa]

4 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

The wording of this statement kind of shocked me. To think of a prophet of god, in this case EGW, had a mandate of either "allowing" or prescribing of when to bath or not to bath; even on Sabbath, seems to contradict a sound Biblical approach in how to keep the Sabbath. My current understanding has a lot of trouble with the context that you used the word "allowing." I dont think there is any evidence of EGW having such an authority in the believer's life, is there? At any rate; when she mentioned the bath thing; she was simply stating what she did and why. it was a personal thing, and all future believers for all time are not through this one or two bath statements, enjoined to not ever bath on Sabbath. It just doesnt make sense to me that she would be this legalistic.

Wanderer,

Perhaps you should consider the full breadth of meaning of the verb "allow."  Its usage here does not predicate a condition in which Mrs. White herself is the arbiter of Sabbath observance...not at all!

The point I was making is simply that God inspired her writings, and she, under His inspiration, said baths were to be taken before Sabbath.  Her inspired statement makes no allowance for exceptions, not that an exception should never be made.  We can always think of something where an exception would be appropriate, but it's not every day that one is sprayed by a skunk, or becomes covered in blood due to some accident, or etc., etc., etc.  Working on the farm, though, with dairy cows, was an every day occurrence.  She would have had it fresh in her mind as she wrote, for she herself owned cows at the time.  To make no such allowance is significant.

For whom was she writing? Herself?  No.  Her words are for us and for our children--messages from God.

[CoAspen]

I see the following statement as very presumptuous. I am certain it would have been better understood in the days of Christ on this earth with a religion trying its best to work its way to heaven. It gives off the odor of salvation by works.

Quote

The point I was making is simply that God inspired her writings, and she, under His inspiration, said baths were to be taken before Sabbath. 

 

[Green Cochoa]

7 minutes ago, CoAspen said:

It gives off the odor of salvation by works.

Perhaps the Ten Commandments are quite odiferous to you.  We aren't saved by works, but we won't be saved without them either.

[CoAspen]

Who said anything about 10 commandments? Could find nothing about the current topic listed in them either!

[Green Cochoa]

56 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

I am sorry I did not explain myself better.  I was very well aware of the other quotes and where they could be found when I posted this. Where in that post did I say that the quote I used from CG was the only place it could be found? This response you have given does not at all answer my question; but my question still stands. Why do you think that this comment about bathing was put into a book called Child Guidance?

Wanderer,

The excerpt was probably put into the book Child Guidance because it applied to children as part of the family in terms of Sabbath observance.  These were testimonies written for all church members, and not merely those of a private letter, for they were published in "Testimonies for the Church."  You may not have said it only occurred in CG, but you took exception to the quote as having come from a compilation.  However, as it also is published in regular, original works, such an objection is unfounded.

[Green Cochoa]

46 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

How would we know if the bath thing is "inspired" since there is not one verse that mentions "no baths on sabbath" in the Bible?

Perhaps you are operating on a false premise.  For my part, I don't need it to be also said in the Bible.  Inspiration builds on itself.  As long as it does not disagree, nor contradict, we're fine.  Now, if the Bible says we should bathe on the Sabbath, then you'd have a case.

[Green Cochoa]

50 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

Based on this thought from her writngs; I think if she were around today and saw what you just did with her writings here on the bathing hub bub, she would take all of her writings from you and throw a Bible at you!

This portion of your post is offensive and off-topic and untenable.

[Gerr]

16 hours ago, pierrepaul said:

As am I. According to my understanding, we do not approach the One whose name is Reverend when we enter a church building or meeting hall. I believe the Bible teaches that our church buildings and meeting halls are not temples; rather our bodies are the new temple (1 Cor 6:19; John 4:21-23); and that we receive the Holy Spirit in us upon baptism (Acts 2:38). In Hebrews 4:24 "approaching the Throne of Grace" is mentioned, but I believe this is properly understood in the context of the heavenly temple, not a church assembly here on earth. We are "approaching" God continually (or rather God has approached us), whether at work, at play, at home, on the bus, etc. Our church services are not temple services; our pastors, ministers and elders are not priests, and our church services do not consist of us "approaching God" as if God was not with us outside of the church building.

Oh, so when you go to a church dedicated in and for His name in the day He has specially set aside, God is not there present to meet with you?

Since our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, how much more important then that we pay attention to what goes in and how we adorn that temple specially when we go and worship Him in the house dedicated to Him on the day He dedicated for fellowship?  The earthly tabernacle and temple were not only beautiful inside but beautiful on the outside as well.

 

[Gerr]

10 hours ago, CoAspen said:

I see the following statement as very presumptuous. I am certain it would have been better understood in the days of Christ on this earth with a religion trying its best to work its way to heaven. It gives off the odor of salvation by works.

 

So when the Israelites were in 3 days preparing to meet God before Sinai which included bathing, they were working their way to heaven?

When I stay away from other women, am I working to earn the love of my wife?

[JoeMo]

Wow.  This thread is truly turning bizarre.  This much angst over what one can or cannot wear to church?  Wow. 

[Gregory Matthews]

The following are additional statements that EGW made about bathing.

1)      Frequent bathing is very beneficial, especially at night, just before retiring, or upon rising in the morning.  CG 461.2

 

2)      Most persons would receive benefit from a cool or tepid bath every day, morning or evening.  MH 276.2

 

3)      On Friday let the preparation for the Sabbath be completed. See that all the clothing is in readiness and that all the cooking is done. Let the boots be blacked and the baths be taken.  6T 355.3

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Now I want to discuss the post that I  made above.

1)  People who mis-use EGW often  latch onto a single statement of hers and twist it to claim an absolute that should apply to everyone at all times.

2)  In reality, EGW  a reasonable person.  She is often best understood by gathering multiple statements that she may have made on a subject and drawing them together to  form a coherent whole.

3)  In statement # 3, above, EGW does say that  one should bathe prior to the beginning of the Sabbath.   It could be implied that this should be done on every Friday.  Why, possibly to be as clean as possible in a time when people did not bathe every day.  We could understand this as:  Do a major clean on Friday.  Get your boots to look their best after  a week of work.  Clean the accumulated dirt off of yourself your self after a day or more of working in the fields planting potatoes.

4)  However, note that in # 3, above, EGW does NOT say that one should not bathe on the Sabbath.  Rather, she simply says to take a bath on Friday.  To say that this passage tells us snot to bathe on the Sabbath is putting words in her mouth that she does not say.

5)  Note that in number 2, above, EGW says that many people would benefit by taking a bath everyday, whether     in the morning or in the evening.  NOTE:  She did not make an exception for the Sabbath and state that everyday excluded the Sabbath.  Neither did she say that on the Sabbath, the bath should be only in the evening , after sundown.

 

Conclusion:  EGW taught that Friday should be a day of major preparation for the Sabbath and that should include  preparation of clothing, shoes and cleansing of the body.  But, on every day of the week, to include the Sabbath, a bath would benefit many people.

 

 

[Green Cochoa]

Gregory,

Your conclusions are amiss because you have failed to consider the proper context of her statements.  Most men shave every day.  Mrs. White goes so far as to say one should NOT shave on Sabbath.  She relegates that to the preparation day, so that no such unnecessary work must be done during Sabbath hours.  If shaving, which every eye can see, matters, why would noses have any superior privilege over eyes with respect to bath taking? 

Obviously, Sabbath is not for ironing, washing clothes, washing dishes (unless absolutely necessary), etc., so what makes bathing any different?  I do get the idea that one should enter the Sabbath clean.  That makes sense.  But it also makes sense to rest throughout the day, and not be concerned with so many of the mundane routines that consume time in every other day.  Sabbath is to be special, not ordinary.

In any case, let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.  You have not made a good case to say Ellen White would have approved of bathing on Sabbath.  Far from it.  The weight of evidence still leans heavily the other way.