1 Timothy 2:9 . . . [W]omen should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in seemly apparel, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly attire but by good deeds as befits women who profess religion.
Where does it describe what parts of a person’s skin can be expoesed? Why a one-piece is fine but a two-piece isn’t?
Here ‘modesty’ has the same meaning the word has in my language: not exposing one’s riches, talents, beauty, etc., out of pride. The same as ‘humility’. My language has no word for the US meaning of ‘modesty’ = not exposing …umm?..
skin (?) on one’s abdomen (?), because that inevitably leads to sexual temptation (?).
That’s why I insist modesty is cultural. My culture has no concept of modesty quite like what you mean by it. A tourist brochure about an Arab country that I read warned women to “dress modestly” (in my language). I wondered why women were not to wear expensive dresses and jewelry there until I realized it was translated from English and meant “cover up”.
Would you feel comfortable standing in front of the Lord in a bikini? How about the Blessed Mother?
Yes. Naked too. They see me naked every day.
Re: Adam and Eve in Eden covering up: In every representation, they only cover their sexual organs.I take that to be the absolute minimum, whereas cultures add more. A two-piece swimsuit covers more than a fig leaf.
Re: Unattractive people: if ‘modesty’ means dressing in such a way as not to excite anyone, then obese/unattractive/old people should be allowed, much MORE than young, attractive ones, to go about very scantily dressed. I certainly feel more comfortable in a two-piece on a beach with a postpartum figure, a husband, and a kid. It is VERY OBVIOUS to ANYONE that I’m not trying to excite lust.
