CLOTHING -WHAT DOES THE BIBLE SAY?
We learn from Genesis 3 that clothing was not a choice on the part of man. The call for clothing is closely connected with man acquiring the knowledge of good and evil. It is also obvious that not every choice of covering is acceptable. Adam and Eve sewed fig leaves into an apron. "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).
The Hebrew word for the "aprons" is chargorah, which means a garment that covers the midsection of the body, tied about the waist. The same word is translated in other passages as a girdle or a belt. Adam and Eve's attempt at clothing was unsuccessful, because they still considered themselves naked while wearing the fig leaf aprons. "And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself." (Gen. 3:10) God took animal skins (Hebrew keth-o'-neth meaning coat, garment or robe) and made coats for the man and woman. "Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them." (Genesis 3:21).
Nakedness is the exposure of the private parts. Any clothing that does not cover these areas is considered equivalent to being naked. In Job 22:6, the Bible talks about stripping the naked of their clothing. "For thou hast taken a pledge from thy brother for nought, and stripped the naked of their clothing." In other words, it is possible to be clothed and naked at the same time.
The phrasing in Job refers to a person who is thinly clad, wearing clothing whose material is transparent, leaving people with no doubts about what exists underneath the clothing. A person can also be naked by wearing clothing that does not completely cover the private parts in all situations or positions.
God told the Israelites not to place the altar up where the priest would have to climb steps to reach it (Exodus 20:26). As the priest walked up the steps, there would be the possibility of a worshiper at the base of the steps seeing underneath the priest's garments. As an additional precaution, the priest's garments included short trousers that went around the waist and covered the thighs to cover their nakedness (Exodus 28:42-43). The breeches would be similar to long boxer shorts that extended to the knees. For women, the exposure of the groin region or the breasts was considered nakedness (Ezekiel 16:7).
Any clothing that does not cover your nakedness is not modest. However, clothing that does cover your private parts may still be considered immodest. For example, under the Old Law a man was not allowed to wear women's clothing and a woman could not wear men's clothing (Deuteronomy 22:5). What is considered to be appropriate dress for a man and a woman varies greatly over time and between societies.
Paul addresses the idea of clothing in 1 Timothy 2:9-10: "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works."
This commandment was specifically written for women, but principles taught in this passage can be applied to men as well as women. Christians are to be modestly attired. Few people dispute this. However, when we try to define what modesty is, we are faced with many different opinions.
So how do we figure out what is modest? Fashions are constantly changing. In the late 1800s it was immodest for a woman to show her ankles. Therefore, women wore long dresses and high top boots. Today, no one thinks twice if a woman's ankles show.
Even if we restrict ourselves to the current fashions, there are some outfits that everyone would agree are definitely modest and others that are definitely immodest. However, we can't rely on popular opinion to totally define modesty. What we need is an unchanging yardstick to learn if an outfit is modest. That yardstick will be the Bible.
At a minimum, modest clothing covers a person's nakedness. If it does not, then it is not modest, no matter what the current fashion dictates, Christians should not wear these clothes. Back more years than I would like to admit I worked at a Christian camp. Several of the teen age boys who worked around the swimming area were wearing tight fitting bathing suits and their private parts were so arranged as to be totally exposed behind the bathing suit. That certainly was not modest and as far as I was concerned they were clothed but still naked.
Let's look at I Timothy 2:9-10 again: "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works."
The Greek word for modest is kosmious, which means orderly, well-arranged, seemly, or modest. In other words, "modest" refers to clothing that is neat and appropriate for the occasion. The Greek word that is translated shamefastness is aidos, which means having a sense of shame, modesty, and reverence. A shamefaced person can blush when faced with things that are irreverent or immodest. The Greek word for "sobriety" is sophrosuna. This is a person of sound mind, with self-control, of good judgment, and is moderate in all that he does.
Modest dress doesn't call attention to the wearer. This is a reason why clothing that exposes your nakedness is immodest. People should notice a Christian because of who he is and not because of what he is wearing. The clothing that we wear should fit the occasion so that our attire does not outshine our Lord, whom we represent. Right or wrong, people judge us by the clothes that we wear.
One of the most common "laws" in the church community is that women are not allowed to wear slacks (pants) or makeup in church. This church law is derived from 1 Timothy 2:9-10 along with other such scriptures. Let's examine this church law now to see if it is really a Christian doctrine to be followed by all women.
In 1 Timothy 2:9-10 It appears that Paul is addressing the problem that the women seem to have had in public worship, that is, seeking to turn others' heads. Most Jewish teachers allowed wives to adorn themselves for their husbands, but both Jewish and Greco-Roman moralists ridiculed women who decked themselves out to turn other men's eyes.
Jewish writings warn especially of the sexual temptation involved in such adornments; Greek and Roman writers also condemn wealthy women who show off their costly array. Hair was sometimes braided with gold, which Paul might have in view here; men were especially attracted by women's decorated hair. Like most other writers who condemned such gaudiness, Paul should be understood as attacking excess, not as ruling against all adornment.
Greek
and Roman moralists often stressed that it was inward adornment rather than
outward adornment that would please a good husband; Paul concurs. In 1 Peter
3:3-4 it states: "Whose
adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of
wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of
the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and
quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price."
The specifics Paul mentioned (braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes) are not wrong in themselves because he also mentions apparel, but become inappropriate when they indicate misplaced values (see 1 Peter 3:3 again). In the Ephesian church these styles may have been associated with the local temple prostitutes or other undesirable entities.
Though the specifics are not applicable for all times, the principle of Paul's instructions are applicable for all time. Worship time is not a time for show or excess. The purpose of coming together is to worship God and have instruction in the faith and not to show off the new clothing, hair designs, etc.
SHOULD WOMEN WEAR SLACKS?
Many churches have a rule that women are not supposed to wear slacks to church. I recall that one reason for this is another rule that says that women shouldn't wear men's clothing. Let's look at slacks to see if this is really true or even biblical.
First of all, I have found no such rule in the New Testament. However, the Old Testament does contain such a restriction, or seemingly so at first glance. Deuteronomy 22:5: "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God."
Many people use this verse as the reason why women should not wear slacks. They say that slacks are men's clothes and therefore if women wore slacks then they would be breaking this commandment. Keep in mind that the commandment includes men not putting on women's clothing as well.
In
biblical times both men and women wore loose-fitting robes—but designed
differently for each of the sexes. Can I say that again? "both men
and women wore loose-fitting robes." Did you get that? "both
wore loose-fitting robes." The
point of the verse is that we are not to confuse the sexes; each person is to
gladly identify himself or herself as a man or woman.
"The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man—" The word pertaineth is the Hebrew word kel-ee' and means instrument, weapon, armour bearer, armour, the instruments or arms of a man. As the word is here used, it properly signifies a strong man or man of war, it is very probable that armor is here intended; especially as we know that in the worship of Venus, to which that of Astarte or Ashtaroth among the Canaanites bore a striking resemblance, the women were accustomed to appear in armor before her.
This verse is not primarily a reference to principles of fashion, as one clearly notes in the final clause. Rather this refers to the practice of a deviant sexual behavior which is exhibited in the adoption of dress and behavior unnatural for one's own sex.
The danger, perhaps, lies in its close association with homosexuality (see Lev 18:22 and 20:13, where the same word "abomination" occurs; see also Rom 1:24, note) and in the fact that such practices were often associated with the worship of pagan deities. God considers sacred the distinction of the sexes, as shown in His creative design of man and woman, who, though both in the image of God, are also uniquely and differently designed (see Gen 1:27). Any attempt to erase that distinction is labeled an "abomination."
In understanding Deuteronomy 22:5 is to know the type of clothing that men and women wore. It just so happened that Hebrew men and women wore very similar clothes. They both wore tunics and cloaks. However, there were differences in the details of the design. For example, men's tunics were normally short and colored and the women's tunics were ankle-length and blue with embroidered edges on the V-neck. The tunic, as you may have deduced, is more akin to a dress then a pair of slacks. Therefore, with the aforementioned logic of women not permitted to wear slacks, we would have to exclude women from wearing the dress since men wore "dresses" at the time of this scripture and in Bible times in general.
First of all I find that Deuteronomy 22:5 is not a law that prohibits women from wearing slacks. To interpret any scripture that deals with culture, customs, or social events at a particular time and apply them directly and literally to current times is very dangerous and will mostly lead to the wrong application or interpretation of that scripture. Such is the case here.
The primary assumption is that slacks are men's
clothing. It is also assumed that Deuteronomy 22:5 is merely referring to
cross-dressing. Since both of these assumptions are incorrect, it follows that
the interpretation of this scripture using those assumptions would also be
incorrect, which is the case here.
I believe we can confidently say that women are not forbidden from wearing
slacks by any Old Testament law or a New Testament doctrine. Slacks are not inclusively
men's clothing. It all depends on the region of the world that you live in. In
some cultures, women wear slacks and in others men wear slacks, and in yet others
men and women wear slacks.
There are men's hats and women's hats. There are men's gloves and women's gloves. There are men's coats, sweaters, shirts, shoes, and watches. There are also women's coats, sweaters, shirts (blouses), shoes, and watches. Women's clothing is made differently then men's clothing. Likewise, men's slacks are made differently then women's slacks. To say that slacks in general are men's clothing is, as we know from the facts given previously, a blind acceptance of church dogma. Women shouldn't wear clothes that will attract too much attention to themselves, especially in church services. Neither should men.