HEthePrimate Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 Sarcastic? YesMean? NoI'm sure I'm older than many on the forum, younger than some. But I can distinctly remember days when youth in the church attended activities in tank tops and shorts above the knee. Now I have seen individuals advocate that our youth live up to the same standards of dress as those who have covenanted to do so in the temple. They need to dress as though they are wearing garments. I've heard others attempt to shame even younger children (achievement days, primary etc.) that what they are wearing is immodest. We are all entitled to our opinions. Mine is that we have gone a bit off the deep end on this modesty kick. I think it has gone a bit beyond a reasonable standard. We've moved beyond the concept of teaching correct principles and allowing individuals to govern themselves. That's my opinion. So a bit tongue in cheek, where does it stop? If you are going to have 'impure thoughts' over a shoulder or a belly button, then what about a wrist? A calf? -RMI think you're right that people are starting to go overboard. It is a bit over-the-top, for example, to be giving lessons on dressing modestly to four-year-olds, and to expect them to wear clothing that would cover non-existent garments for four-year-olds. Yes, teach them from when they're young, but there's a time and a place for everything. Let's let kids have a childhood, for heaven's sake!Plus, they're defining 'modesty' too narrowly. It may be partly about clothing and hair styles, but not only that. It's also about not getting puffed up with pride, not putting yourself above or before other people, and not doing the Rameumpton thing.Likewise, our discussions about morality should not be only about sex--it's much broader than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 Tempest in the proverbial tea pot. You should see how some of the teen age gals dress in our Ward...oh my and how some of the adult sisters dress. Seriously, jeans that look painted on, very tight skirts that look like the wrong move could cause a tear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hala401 Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 I disagree with the notion that all sin is equal. Following that logic, baring one's shoulder is just as bad as going completely naked.And the idea that any sin keeps us out of the presence of God was pretty much disproven by Jesus' entire life and ministry. God came down and lived among wretched, sinful human beings for over 30 years, ate with them, forgave them, loved them, and died for them.I was victimized by the "all sin is not equal" crowd, so my emotions are very strong around the issue. If all sin is not equal then when do we just not forgive? Where does it start? I'm sorry I can not be rational about this, but just wanted to open the idea that we have to be really careful who we play God with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dravin Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 If all sin is not equal then when do we just not forgive?I'm not sure how it follows that if there is a sliding scale of sin that there is a line of 'seriousness' where one doesn't have to forgive. We're commanded to forgive everyone, the discretion of not forgiving isn't up to us and that would be the same regardless of if there is a sliding scale of sin 'seriousness' or if all sin is equal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HEthePrimate Posted May 2, 2012 Report Share Posted May 2, 2012 Some people would say that drinking coffee is a sin. Most people would agree that murdering your boss and hacking him to pieces is a sin. Very few people would agree that drinking coffee and hacking your boss to pieces are equally serious. Honestly, how obvious can it get? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlimac Posted May 2, 2012 Report Share Posted May 2, 2012 It's a really good thing these chaperons weren't at my prom.....no one would be at prom. Except the guys.I think my daughter was the ONLY one dressed modestly at her prom in MN. She's lined up for pictures with at least 10 other girls ALL in strapless dresses. I have to say, (no bias or anything ) my daughter was the most beautiful and radiant of the group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wingnut Posted May 2, 2012 Report Share Posted May 2, 2012 Sarcastic? YesMean? NoI'm sure I'm older than many on the forum, younger than some. But I can distinctly remember days when youth in the church attended activities in tank tops and shorts above the knee. Now I have seen individuals advocate that our youth live up to the same standards of dress as those who have covenanted to do so in the temple. They need to dress as though they are wearing garments. I've heard others attempt to shame even younger children (achievement days, primary etc.) that what they are wearing is immodest. We are all entitled to our opinions. Mine is that we have gone a bit off the deep end on this modesty kick. I think it has gone a bit beyond a reasonable standard. We've moved beyond the concept of teaching correct principles and allowing individuals to govern themselves. That's my opinion. So a bit tongue in cheek, where does it stop? If you are going to have 'impure thoughts' over a shoulder or a belly button, then what about a wrist? A calf? -RMPerhaps "mean" wasn't the right word. I agree with everything you've said here. I just thought the burqa reference was insensitive, especially given that we now have a very active member of this forum who is a (recently) former Muslim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maureen Posted May 2, 2012 Report Share Posted May 2, 2012 Please show me some scriptures that say sin will allow you to reside in the presence of God.As Jesus was having a meal in Levi’s home, many tax collectors and sinners were eating with Jesus and his disciples, for there were many who followed him. When the experts in the law and the Pharisees saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors, they said to his disciples, “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?” When Jesus heard this he said to them, “Those who are healthy don’t need a physician, but those who are sick do. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” (Mark 2:15-17, NET Bible)I think this is what HEthePrimate was referring to.M. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dravin Posted May 2, 2012 Report Share Posted May 2, 2012 (edited) As Jesus was having a meal in Levi’s home, many tax collectors and sinners were eating with Jesus and his disciples, for there were many who followed him. When the experts in the law and the Pharisees saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors, they said to his disciples, “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?” When Jesus heard this he said to them, “Those who are healthy don’t need a physician, but those who are sick do. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” (Mark 2:15-17, NET Bible)I think this is what HEthePrimate was referring to.M.I'm sure it's what he was referencing but the relevance is a bit hard to see. Ram was pointing out that even the smallest stain of sin is quite literally damning (this is why we need the atonement so desperately). That Christ ministered to sinners and publicans isn't a counterpoint to such. I think HE is trying to draw attention to Christ's power to cleanse us but it's not immediately obvious how that negates Ram's point. 1) Any stain of sin will keep us from God's presence.2) The stain of sin can be removed by the power of Christ's atonement.Both points are true and neither is a counterpoint to the truthfulness of the other. Edited May 2, 2012 by Dravin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.