Welcome to the fifth generation of our website dealing with God’s Dress Code. The fourth generation of our website is still on-line at //lfnexus.com/indexvicepatrol.htm.
Skip To Most Recent Articles
Because some can’t read, here is a schematic that approximately explains proper dress:
Now, the word “provocative” means “arousing indecent desire” and, because some do not have common sense, we add the following:
Provocative dress is any form of dress that reveals more than:
The lower legs below the knees, three-quarters of each of the arms below the top one-quarter of each of the arms, the neck part of the torso, and the head, in any physical posture and any angle(s) of public perception. In addition, clothing that simulates absence of clothing is not considered clothing; for example, skintight clothing is not considered clothing.
Again, because some can’t read, here is a schematic that approximately explains proper dress:
Technical note: It is implicit in all references to 1611 linguistic understanding (meaning) in this article that the Hebrew or Greek linguistic understanding is in perfect agreement. This is a matter of linguistic science, not assumption.
God (the Bible) answers this question indirectly, as He (It) does many questions. First, God condemns public nakedness. This is true in the Bible starting in the very first book of the Bible. (There are 43 verses in the Bible that use the word “nakedness.”) Genesis 9:23 says:
And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father [Noah]; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father’s [Noah’s] nakedness.
Now, what does the word “nakedness” mean in the Bible? Nakedness is the quality of being naked. Hebrew language scholars, e.g., Strong, tell us that the word “naked” in the Bible means:
nude, either partially or totally
Thus, we infer that a person can be considered naked even if the lower part of their body is completely covered.
Now, the key question is:
Where does clothedness end and nakedness begin?
Again, Hebrew language scholars, e.g., Strong, tell us the precise meaning of the word “nakedness”:
nudity, literally (especially the pudenda)
The word “pudenda” means:
the external genital organs of a human being
For our super technical friends, the definition of the word “pudenda” in 1611 was:
the parts of generation
This means the precise definition of “pudenda” is:
the genital organs of a human being
Now, some will seize on this and say that neither a part nor all of the upper part of the body constitutes one or more genital organs and, therefore, there is no restriction on the uncovering of the upper part of the body. This leads us to the psychical (“mental”) element of nakedness but we will resume the discussion of the physical side of things later in this article.
The Bible addresses nakedness in more than one dimension; that is, the Bible addresses nakedness both physically and psychically. The psychical element is determined by the genetically determined response of other human beings. Common sense tells us (we have studies for the “study lovers”) that most people are increasingly “affected” the more skin another person reveals.
Now, regarding women (this applies to men as well), the Bible makes it crystal clear that women have a responsibility to avoid this increasing affectedness. In other words, don’t get men excited, ladies! The Bible says in I Timothy 2:9:
In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel [clothing], with shamefacedness and sobriety…
This verse establishes the fact that:
Some ways of dressing are right (modest apparel [clothing]) and some are wrong.
Note also that the word “modest” conveys the idea of:
something that conforms to a socially recognized pattern
Greek language scholars, e.g., Strong, tell us that the Greek word for “modest” involves the idea of:
order[liness] [in the sense of a socially recognized pattern]
And that the Greek word for “modest” comes from another Greek word that means:
orderly arrangement [in the sense of a socially recognized pattern]
This establishes the fact that how a person dresses is governed, to some extent, by:
something outside of themselves, by an objective authority
Now, Greek language scholars, e.g., Strong, tell us that the word “shamefacedness” means:
bashfulness, that is, (towards men), modesty
The definition of the word “shamefacedness” in 1611 was:
bashfulness; excess of modesty
The word “bashfulness” in 1611 meant (from Noah Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of American English):
Excessive or extreme modesty; a quality of mind often visible in external appearance, as in blushing, a downcast look , confusion. &c [etc.].
Note that a woman is to have a certain “quality of mind.” This quality of mind results in their avoidance of the affectedness (read above) of men.
Now, so far, we have established:
How one dresses is not totally up to them; there is an objective authority to be heeded.
The definition of nudity (nakedness) for the lower part of the body is a lack of concealment (coveredness).
The attitude of nudity (nakedness) relative to any part of the body is to be one of extreme modesty.
Still, however, we have not provided any objective authority (moral reason and conscience are internal authorities and attitude just means you are willing to do the right thing once you learn what it is)…still, however, we have not provided any objective authority for what part of the upper body should be covered and, specifically, where should the neckline be?
First, we will provide the not-strongest objective authorities:
Your parents teach you how to dress modestly.
Your teachers teach you how to dress modestly.
Most of society teaches you how to dress modestly.
Now, here is the strongest authority. God (the Bible) says in Genesis 3:7:
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.
Now, be careful. Language can be a funny thing. The garments used to first cover nakedness were aprons. However:
The word “apron” has changed in meaning since 1611. In 1611, the word “apron” meant “[something] worn on the forepart of the body.”
The word “forepart” in 1611 meant:
the anterior part
The word “anterior” in 1611 meant:
before or in front in place
It is clear that the first garment covered the front of the body.
Now, we know there will be a handful of silly people who will be asking “What about the back and sides of the body?” Yes, the back and sides were covered as well (see our upcoming super technical discussion). Our focus in this article is the neckline.
Now, there is one point for which we would like to provide additional evidence (this is not the only additional evidence or even the best additional evidence) and that is:
How far up and down the body did the apron extend?
Well, the word “front” in 1611 meant (see Grisheimchoff via Lionwrit):
the forward region from top to bottom
And the word “body” in discussions of attire in 1611 meant (see Grisheimchoff’s son, Stewart G., via Lionwrit):
the physical structure of a human being from the bottom of the neck to the soles of the feet
Note the words “bottom of the neck.” Therefore, a person is to be covered from the bottom of the neck downward. In other words:
The neckline must be at the bottom of the neck (or higher).
Now, we know there are many more technical questions on this subject that can be asked and answered. We will do just that when we have the opportunity. For additional insights and information see our XEGP titled Fact & Vice Patrol.
There are over 87 verses in the Bible that touch upon or deal with this subject. Please note that we are obviously talking about the lower part of dresses as well. What follows applies to both women and men.
The Bible says in Exodus 28:42:
“And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover…from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach.”
There’s the answer: “breeches…from the loins to the thighs.” Let’s take a closer look at this passage of Scripture.
First, what are the “loins”? II Samuel 20:8 says: “…a sword fastened upon his loins….” We all know where a sword is worn. We’ve all seen sword-fighting scenes in pirate movies. A sword is worn at the waist. The loins refer to the waist. So, a skirt and a man’s pair of pants start at the waist. Therefore, these garments must extend at least (they can be longer) “from the waist to the thighs.” Now, the word “thighs” has been in use since before 1100 A.D. (see Webster’s dictionary). The meaning of the word “thighs” has not changed in over 900 years. Here is a part of Webster’s definition: “…limb extending…to the knee[s]….” Therefore, a skirt and a man’s pair of pants must extend at least (they can be longer) “from the waist to the knees.” Now, the word “breeches” also has been in use since before 1100 A.D. (see Webster’s dictionary). The meaning of the word “breeches” also has not changed in over 900 years. Here’s a part of Webster’s definition: “short pants…fitting snugly at the lower edges….” This tells us that WHATEVER YOU WEAR MUST PREVENT ANYONE FROM SEEING BENEATH YOUR GARMENT. Obviously, on a grown woman, a knee-length garment is not going to be long enough in certain situations.
Now, you might be a little confused. We proved that one’s garment only needs to extend down to the knees and now we’re saying that it has to be longer. Read on. The verse above says: “BREECHES…from the waist to the knees.” So, yes, a woman can wear a skirt that extends down to the knees and a man can wear pants that extend down to the knees…BUT, IF SO, THE BOTTOM OF THE SKIRT OR PANTS MUST END IN TWO PANTS LEGS THAT FIT “SNUGLY AT THE LOWER EDGES” OF EACH OF THE TWO PANTS LEGS. If you don’t want to wear a skirt or pants ending in two pants legs that fit “snugly at the lower edges” of each of the two pants legs, you must wear a garment that extends down LOW ENOUGH TO PREVENT ANYONE FROM SEEING BENEATH YOUR GARMENT IN EVERY SITUATION. This means, in part, that the garment must extend BELOW THE KNEES while one is sitting and SUITABLY LONGER IF ONE WERE LYING DOWN IN PUBLIC.
Clothing that simulates absence of clothing is not considered clothing; for example, skintight clothing is not considered clothing. In plain English, a person must not wear skintight clothing.