Recently someone asked our blogging team to take on the challenge of dealing with immodesty.\u00a0 One does not have to think more than 30 seconds to see some of the challenges.<\/p>\n
Challenge #1: <\/strong><\/p>\n Let\u2019s pretend that you were browsing a National Geographic magazine.\u00a0 In this particular issue there were two articles related to areas of the world where clothes are simply optional.\u00a0 Would you say that they are immodest?\u00a0 Or would you excuse that behavior as part of their culture (they don\u2019t have easy access to a mall, Meijer, or even Wal-Mart)?\u00a0 I suspect that many of you would not really think much about it.\u00a0 You would read the article and move on.<\/p>\n The situation is very different, however, when one sees a skimpy dressed model on the cover of Cosmopolitan with a headline of \u201c10 great tips to drive your man crazy in bed.\u201d<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Even if the \u201ctips\u201d article has nothing to do with who is on the cover, it will not take very long for those browsing at the checkout line to put those two pieces together.\u00a0 Isn\u2019t that what the editors want?\u00a0 Don\u2019t they want us to draw that connection?\u00a0 Would this lady be immodest?\u00a0 If you had your 13 year old son standing with you, would you say she is immodest?<\/p>\n Challenge #2:<\/strong><\/p>\n Am I being immodest when the doctor asks me to remove some of my clothing for the purpose of an exam?\u00a0 Most of us would probably say \u201cno.\u201d Could the doctor put me in a situation where he\/she is causing me to immodest?\u00a0 I will not give examples, but I think we can all think of a few.<\/p>\n So, does immodesty = skimpy or no clothing?<\/strong> I am not ready to make that equation.\u00a0 After all, isn\u2019t it possible to be \u201ccovered up\u201d and still be immodest?<\/p>\n So, part of the challenge is giving a definition to immodesty that is flexible enough to cover these bases.\u00a0 Immodesty might be better defined as \u201cthe desire to draw attention to oneself and encourage others to view you as \u201cattractive\u201d or \u201csexy\u201d through the means of revealing clothing to persons who should not view you this way or see what you are showing.\u201d<\/strong> This last phrase attempts to solve one additional potential problem; namely, is it acceptable for a husband or wife to dress or reveal himself or herself to his or her beloved?\u00a0 The answer is obvious.<\/p>\n It should be clear that immodesty is not simply defined by the lack or type of clothing, but it also involves the audience and the intended result.\u00a0 Immodesty is an issue of the heart, not simply an issue of what one puts on their body.<\/strong><\/p>\n Using this definition of immodesty makes it pretty clear that immodesty is a sin.\u00a0 It is selfish rather than selfless (as Christ would encourage Phil 2:5-11), it is loveless since you are intentionally encouraging others to sin (1 Cor 8-10 clearly explains how loving others encourages us not to do things that might cause them to stumble), and it is prideful since you want others to notice you (as opposed to the humility God encourages in James 4:6).<\/em><\/p>\n So, are you immodest?<\/p>\n