Question
Brother Sharp, I’ve just read the article on modest apparel by Michelle Sharp. I’m somewhat perplexed. In most all of our young peoples bible study workbooks they show artists perceptions of the clothing worn in the 1st century. I have yet to find a woman clothed at that period of time just to her knees or just below. Are we teaching our children untruths by showing or giving them workbooks that have erroneous pictures in them? I recently downloaded a picture by an artist who had portrayed Sarah (Abraham’s wife) in a robe that flowed to her feet. I then went to a web site that portrayed Dorcas and Peter in long flowing robes down to their feet. Was that wrong? Did they really wear dresses to just below their knees or did the men really wear pants?
What I’m getting at is that our culture is so far removed from the 1st century that it appears that we don’t really know what modest apparel was in bible days. When you stand up to preach, look down at your shoes. Does your clothing come to your feet? I would guess that your clothing is a whole lot closer to your feet than most of the women in the congregation. We men constrain ourselves to be clothed to the neck, feet, and wrists and yet the women sit there with exposed arms, legs and collarbones. Do we have 2 rules of modesty and the men’s rules being more strict than the women to whom 1 Tim 2:9,10 is addressed?
When the restoration movement began, women were dressed a whole lot more modest than they are now. Yet men are dressed almost the same as they were then. Particularly in public worship.
I’d like to hear from you.
Answer
Keith Sharp
Thanks for the question/discussion concerning modesty. I will try to provide a scriptural answer to your question without binding my opinions or the customs of society of any period or place, biblical or otherwise.
Custom
Apparently, in first century Greek and Roman society, women were customarily veiled as a sign of submission to their husbands (1 Corinthians 11:2-16). But in Palestine in the day of the patriarch Judah, a woman wore a veil to symbolize she was a prostitute! (Genesis 38:13-15) Quite a difference in customs! Our concern should be less with customs, whether of the first, nineteenth, or twenty-first century, and more with divine principles of modesty.
Modesty
The apostle Paul instructed:
in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works (1 Timothy 2:9-10).
Thayer notes that in 1 Timothy 2:9 the terms translated “modest” denotes “decently” (356). The inspired penman describes modest apparel in the remainder of the passage. Rather than giving a detailed description of such clothing, the inspired writer reveals four criteria of proper dress, each of which pertains to the heart, i.e., to attitudes. Had he done otherwise, application of this portion of the universal gospel would indeed be limited to societies in which clothing was identical or essentially parallel to that worn in the first century Roman Empire. But, since Paul addresses himself to attitudes, it is apparent the application is universal, applicable in every society until the end of time.
With Propriety
Modest dress is “with propriety.” The American Standard Version renders this “shamefastness.” Both Vine (4:17) and Thayer (14) define it as “a sense of shame.” Trench explains it to be that sense of shame “which shrinks from overpassing the limits of womanly reserve and modesty, as well as from the dishonour which would justly attach thereto” (71-72). A woman who dresses “with propriety” is directed by a sense of shame rooted “fast” in her character that prevents her from dressing shamefully.
Public nakedness is shameful (Revelation 3:18). When Adam and Eve ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, “they knew that they were naked” (Genesis 3:7). They “sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings” (Ibid). This term “coverings” means a “girdle, loin-covering” (Gesenius. 292). They had on something like a modern, man’s swim suit. When God came walking in the garden, Adam hid, for he was afraid, since he “was naked” (Genesis 3:10). While scantily clothed, the man was still naked, both in his own eyes and in God’s (Genesis 3:11). God “clothed them” by giving them “tunics of skin” (Genesis 3:21). Such garments are “generally with sleeves, to the knees, but seldom to the ankles (sic)” (Wilson. 81).
While scantily clothed, the first pair was still naked. Their clothing was both too low and too high. It didn’t cover their torsos or their thighs. That was shameful, immodest. God clothed both the man and the woman with garments that covered them. They were no longer naked.
This conclusion is confirmed by another Old Testament passage. In a prophecy of Babylon’s destruction, Isaiah pictures the ancient city as a “virgin daughter” who would be forced to “uncover the thigh.” Thus, he warns:
“Your nakedness shall be uncovered,
Yes, your shame shall be seen” (Isaiah 47:1-3).
Proper for Women Professing Godliness
The term “godliness” in 1 Timothy 2:10 is from a term which denotes “the fear or reverence of God” (Vine. 2:162). The Scriptures mention two types of dress for women. Paul admonishes women to wear clothing “which is proper for women professing godliness.” Solomon describes the “immoral woman,” “the seductress,” who wears “the attire of a harlot” (Proverbs 7:5,10).
When I was in South Africa, Brother Les Maydell pointed out to me some young women standing by the road dressed in tight fitting, revealing clothing. He said they were prostitutes. Other women standing nearby waiting for public transportation were dressed in long, loose fitting clothing. At one glance a passerby could tell which were advertising their availability and which were concerned about their reputation.
Moderation
The second term descriptive of modest dress is “moderation.” Arndt and Gingrich define the word as “good judgment, moderation, self control…. Esp. as a feminine virtue decency, chastity” (810).
Not With Braided Hair or Gold or Pearls or Costly Clothing
The third description is negative: “not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing.” Does the inspired apostle forbid women to wear braids in their hair or to wear any jewelry or costly clothing? The “virtuous wife” (Proverbs 31:10) dressed in “fine linen and purple” (Proverbs 31:22). The apostle Peter, in language parallel to Paul’s, exhorts women, “Do not let your beauty be that outward adorning of arranging the hair, of wearing gold, or of putting on fine apparel” (1 Peter 3:3). “Fine” is italicized, an addition of the translators. If we take Simon Peter literally, it is a sin for a woman to put on any clothes! Obviously Peter is using a common Jewish figure of speech, the denial of the lesser to emphasize the greater (cf. John 6:27).
Women of Roman society, as women today, were prone to wear elaborate and expensive hairdos, even to the point of braiding the hair with gold or silver strands or lacing it with gold, silver, or jewels; to dress in outlandish, expensive clothing in order to draw attention to themselves and to their wealth; and to wear expensive jewelry. Sounds like Hollywood, doesn’t it? The apostles simply teach women to place the emphasis where it belongs, on “the hidden person of the heart, with the incorruptible ornament of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in the sight of God” (1 Peter 3:4).
Lewdness
The apostle Paul charged that Gentiles of his day characteristically had “given themselves over to lewdness, to work all uncleanness with greediness” (Ephesians 4:17-19). “Lewdness” primarily means “shamelessness.” “The prominent idea is shameless conduct” (Vine. 2:310). Lewd people feel no shame for shameful conduct. Jeremiah denounced the Jews of his day:
Were they ashamed when they had committed abominations? No! They were not at all ashamed; Nor did they know how to blush (Jeremiah 6:15; 8:12).
People who shamelessly parade in public with inadequate or sexually alluring clothing practice lewdness. Obviously, many modern skirts are far too short, but many modern blouses are also too low. When women wear form fitting or “see through” clothing, or show their bare mid sections, or men go shirtless in public, they are putting a stumbling block to lust before others.
Conclusion
Christians do not have to dress as the Amish in order to please God. In fact, we are not to show off our religion in our clothing (Matthew 23:5). Nor do we have to be concerned about the customary dress of Bible times, which varied over time and from society to society, just as it does today.
But, God does have a standard for our clothing. He wants us to exercise a sense of shame that shrinks from exposing our nakedness, to show sound judgment and decency, to avoid an over emphasis on the outward person shown by gaudy, expensive clothing, hairdos, and jewelry, and to dress in such a way that we exhibit godly character, not immorality. He does not want women or men to tempt the opposite sex to lust by their clothing or lack thereof.
List of Works Cited
Arndt, F.W. and W.F. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament.
Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius, Hebrew and English Lexicon.
Thayer, J.H., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament.
Trench, R.C., Synonyms of the New Testament.
Vine, W.E., Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.
Wilson, William., Old Testament Word Studies
