1Corinthians 14:34

Verse 34: let your women keep silence in the churches] this was a Jewish ordinance; women were not permitted to teach in the assemblies, or even to ask questions.  The rabbins taught that “a woman should know nothing but the use of her distaff.”  And the sayings of Rabbi Eliezer, as delivered, Bammidbar Rabba, sec. 9, fol. 204, are both worthy of remark and of execration; they are these: “Let the words of the law be burned, rather than that they should be delivered to women.”


This was their condition till the time of the Gospel: when, according to the prediction of Joel, the Spirit of God was to be poured out on the women as well as the men, that they might prophesy, i.e. teach.  And that they did prophesy or teach is evident from what the apostle says 1Co 11:5, where he lays down rules to regulate this part of their conduct while ministering in the church as has been discussed above.


But does not what the apostle says here contradict that statement, and show that the words in Chap. 11 should be understood in another sense?  For, here it is expressly said that they should keep silence in the church; for it was not permitted to a woman to speak.  Both places seem perfectly consistent.  It is evident from the context that the apostle refers here to asking questions, and what we call dictating in the assemblies.  It was permitted to any man to ask questions, to object, altercate, attempt to refute, &c., in the synagogue; but this liberty was not allowed to any woman.  St. Paul confirms this in reference also to the Christian Church; he orders them to keep silence; and, if they wished to learn anything, let them inquire of their husbands at home; because it was perfectly indecorous for women to be contending with men in public assemblies, on points of doctrine, cases of conscience, &c.  But this by no means intimated that when a woman received any particular influence from God to enable her to teach, that she was not to obey that influence; on the contrary, she was to obey it, and the apostle lays down directions in chap. 11 for regulating her personal appearance when thus employed.  All that the apostle opposes here is their questioning, finding fault, disputing, &c., in the Christian Church, as the Jewish men were permitted to do in their synagogues; together with the attempts to usurp any authority over the man, by setting up their judgment in opposition to them; for the apostle has in view, especially, acts of disobedience, arrogance, &c., of which no woman would be guilty who was under the influence of the Spirit of God.


But to be under obedience, as also saith the law] this is a reference to Gen 3:16: thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. From this it is evident that it was the disorderly and disobedient that the apostle had in view; and not any of those on whom God had poured out his Spirit.


Genesis 35:1-5 – Exodus 33:1-6


Gen 35:4 and they gave unto Jacob all the strange gods which were in their hand, and all their earrings which were in their ears; and Jacob hid them under the oak which was by Shechem.


Verse 4: and ear-rings which were in their ears] whether these rings were in the ears of the gods, or in those of Jacob’s family, we may rest assured that they were not mere ornaments, but served for superstitious purposes.  Ear-rings were certainly worn as amulets and charms, first consecrated to some god, or formed under some constellation, on which magical characters and images were drawn. It was evidently intended for the ear, as the opening is too small for any human finger; and it is engraved all over with strange characters and images, which prove that it was intended for a talisman or amulet.  It was suspended from the tip of the ears both of men and women, not for the purpose of ornament, but through an execrable superstition, for the service of demons.


Ex 33:5 For the LORD had said unto Moses, Say unto the children of Israel, Ye are a stiffnecked people: I will come up into the midst of thee in a moment, and consume thee: therefore now put off thy ornaments from thee, that I may know what to do unto thee.


1Timothy 2:9-10


1Ti 2:9: in like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; {broided: or, plaited} 1Pe 3:3


Verse 9: in like manner also] that is, he wills or commands what follows, as he had commanded what went before.


That women adorn themselves] the apostle seems to refer here to different parts of the Grecian and Roman dress.  The stolh, stola, seems to have been originally very simple.  It was a long piece of cloth, doubled in the middle, and sewed up on both sides, leaving room only for the arms; at the top, a piece was cut out, or a slit made, through which the head passed.  It hung down to the feet, both before and behind, and was girded with the zona round the body, just under the breasts.  It was sometimes made with, sometimes without, sleeves; and, that it might sit the better, it was gathered on each shoulder with a band or buckle.  Some of the Greek women wore them open on each side, from the bottom up above the knee, so as to discover a part of the thigh.  These were termed fainomhridev, showers (discoverers) of the thigh; but it was, in general, only young girls or immodest women who wore them thus. THIS ARE WHAT WE CALL IN TODAYS LANGUAGE, SUSPENDERS OR WINDBREAKERS WHICH LEAVES WOMEN BREASTS OPEN AND ARMPITS FOR EVERYONE TO SEE.


The katastolh seems to have been the same as the pallium or mantle, which, being made nearly in the form of the stola, hung down to the waist, both in back and front, was gathered on the shoulder with a band or buckle, had a hole or slit at top for the head to pass through, and hung loosely over the stola, without being confined by the zona or girdle. A more modest and becoming dress than the Grecian was never invented; it was, in a great measure, revived in England about the year 1805, and in it, simplicity, decency, and elegance were united; but it soon gave place to another mode, in which frippery and nonsense once more prevailed. It was too rational to last long; and too much like religious simplicity to be suffered in a land of shadows, and a world of painted outsides.


With shamefacedness and sobriety]  the stola, catastola, girdle, though simple in themselves, were often highly ornamented both with gold and precious stones; and, both among the Grecian and Roman women, the hair was often crisped and curled in the most variegated and complex manner.  The costly raiment might refer to the materials out of which the raiment was made, and to the workmanship; the gold and pearls, to the ornaments on the raiment.


With shame-facedness or modesty, meta aidouv.  This would lead them to avoid everything unbecoming or meretricious in the mode or fashion of their dress. WHAT HAS CREPT UNTO THE CHILDREN OF GOD IS FASHIONS, THAT WHICH IS PRACTICED BY HEATHENS.


With sobriety, moderation would lead them to avoid all unnecessary expense.  They might follow the custom or costume of the country as to the dress itself, for nothing was ever more becoming than the Grecian stola, catastola, and zona; but they must not imitate the extravagance of those who, through impurity or littleness of mind, decked themselves merely to attract the eye of admiration, or set in lying action the tongue of flattery.  Woman has been invidiously defined: “An animal fond of dress” how long will they permit themselves to be thus degraded?!


The extravagance to which the Grecian and Asiatic women went in their ornaments might well be a reason for the apostle’s command. When either women or men spend much time, cost, and attention on decorating their persons, it affords a painful proof that within there is little excellence, and that they are endeavoring to supply the want of mind and moral good by the feeble and silly aids of dress and ornament.  Were religion out of the question, common sense would say in all these things: be decent; but be moderate and modest.


1 Peter 3:3-6

1Pe 3:3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;


Verse 3:   who’s adorning] plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold] plaiting the hair, and variously folding it about the head, was the most ancient and most simple mode of disposing of this chief ornament of the female head.  It was practised anciently in every part of the east, and is so to the present day in India, in China, and also in Barbary. It was also prevalent among the Greeks and Romans, as ancient gems, busts, and statues, still remaining, sufficiently declare. We have a remarkable instance of the plaiting of the hair in a statue of Agrippina, wife of Germanicus, an exact representation of which may be seen in a work of Andre Lens, entitled Le Costume de Peuple de I’ Antiquite, pl. 33.  Many plates in the same work show the different modes of dressing the hair which obtained among the Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Persians, and other nations.  Thin plates of gold were often mixed with the hair, to make it appear more ornamental by the reflection of light and of the solar rays. Small golden buckles were also used in different parts; and among the Roman ladies, pearls and precious stones of different colours. These latter ornaments were not introduced among the Roman women till the time of Sylla, about 110 years before the Christian era.  But it is evident, from many remaining monuments, that in numerous cases the hair differently plaited and curled was the only ornament of the head.  Often a simple pin, sometimes of ivory, pointed with gold, seemed to connect the plaits.  In monuments of antiquity, the heads of the married and single women may be known, the former by the hair being parted from the forehead over the middle of the top of the head, the latter by being quite close, or being plaited and curled all in a general mass.


An ornament, as Crates said, is that which adorns.  The proper ornament of a woman is that which BECOMES HER BEST; this is neither gold, nor pearls, nor scarlet; but those things which are an evident proof of gravity, regularity, and modesty.”  The wife of Phocion, a celebrated Athenian general, receiving a visit from a lady who was elegantly adorned with gold and jewels, and her hair with pearls, took occasion to call the attention of her guest to the elegance and costliness of her dress, remarking at the same time, “My ornament is my husband.” Now, for the twentieth year general of the Athenians, how few Christian women act this part!  Women are in general at as much pains and cost in their dress, as if by it they were to be recommended both to God and man.  It is, however, in every case, the argument either of a shallow mind, or of a vain and corrupted heart.


Revelation 17:4


Re 17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: {decked:. gilded}

Jer 51:7; Da 11:38; Re 14:8; 18:6, 12, 16


Verse 4; and the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication] this strikingly represents the most pompous and costly manner in which the Latin Church has held forth to the nations the rites and ceremonies of its idolatrous and corrupt worship.


Revelation 2:20

2 Kings 9:30

Ezekiel 23:40

Eze 23:40 and furthermore, that ye have sent for men to come from far, unto whom a messenger was sent; and, lo, they came: for whom thou didst wash thyself, paintedst thy eyes, and deckedst thyself with ornaments, {to come: Heb. coming}

Ru 3:3; 2Ki 9:30; Isa 57:9; Jer 4:30


Verse 40; thou didst wash thyself, paintedst thy eyes, and deckedst thyself with ornaments.] This is exactly the way in which a loose female in Bengal adorns herself to receive guests. She first bathes, then rubs black paint around her eyes, and then covers her body with ornaments – WARD’S Customs.




1Corinthians 11:14

14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?


Verse 14: doth not-nature-teach you, that, if a man have long hair] nature certainly teaches us, by bestowing it, that it is proper for women to have long hair; and it is not so with men. The hair of the male rarely grows like that of a female, unless art is used, and even then it bears but a scanty proportion to the former.  Hence it is truly womanish to have long hair, and it is a shame to the man who affects it.  In ancient times the people of Achaia, the province in which Corinth stood, and the Greeks in general, were noted for their long hair; and hence called by Homer, in a great variety of places, the long-haired Greeks, or Achaeans.  Soldiers, in different countries, have been distinguished for their long hair; but whether this can be said to their praise or blame, or whether Homer uses it always as a term of respect, when he applies it to the Greeks, I shall not wait here to inquire.  Long hair was certainly not in repute among the Jews.  The Nazarites let their hair grow, but it was as a token of humiliation; and it is possible that St. Paul had this in view.  There were consequently two reasons why the apostle should condemn this practice: – 1 because it was a sign of humiliation and 2 because it was womanish. After all it is possible that St. Paul may refer to dressed, frizzled and curled hair, which shallow and effeminate men might have affected in that time, as they do in this.  Perhaps there is not a sight more ridiculous in the eye of common sense than a high-dressed, curled, cued, and powdered head, with which the operator must have taken considerable pains, and the silly patient lost much time and comfort in submitting to what all but senseless custom must call an indignity and degradation.  Hear nature, common sense, and reason, and they will inform you, that if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him. It’s worthy reading the parallels in Eze 44:20.


Neither shall they shave their heads, nor allow their locks to grow long; they shall only cut off the hair of their heads (Le 21:5)


Ezekiel 44:20; neither … shave … heads–as mourners do (Le 21:1-5)]. The worshippers of the Egyptian idols Serapis and Isis shaved their heads; another reason why Jehovah’s priests are not to do so nor suffer … locks to grow long as the luxurious, barbarians, and soldiers in warfare did [NOTES FROM JEROME]. The priests of Isis shaved their heads close to the skin; the priests of Budhoo do so still, their ordinances oblige them to shave their heads every tenth day. To let the hair grow long would have been improper; therefore the Lord commands them to poll (cut, trim) the hair short, but not to shave.


1Timothy 2:8

Verse 8:   I will therefore] seeing the apostle had his authority from Christ, and spoke nothing but what he received from him, his words I shall not fear to express.


That men pray] that is, for the blessings promised in this testimony of God.  For, although God has provided them, yet he will not give them to such as will not pray. See 1Ti 2:1, the subject of which is here resumed.


Everywhere] ev panti topw: in every place.  That they should always have a praying heart and this will ever find a praying place.  This may refer to a Jewish superstition.  They thought, at first, that no prayer could be acceptable that was not offered at the temple at Jerusalem; afterward this was extended to the Holy Land; but, when they became dispersed among the nations, they built oratories or places of prayer, principally by rivers and by the seaside; and in these they were obliged to allow that public prayer might be legally offered, but nowhere else.  In opposition to this, the apostle, by the authority of Christ, commands men to pray everywhere; that all places belong to God’s dominions; and, as he fills every place, in every place he may be worshipped and glorified.


Lifting up holy hands] the early Christians turned up their palms towards heaven, as those craving help do; (1Ki 8:22; Ps 141:2). The Jews washed their hands before prayer (Ps 26:6). Paul figuratively (compare Job 17:9; Jas 4:8) uses language alluding to this custom here: so Isa 1:15, 16. The Greek for “holy” means hands which have committed no impiety, and observed every sacred duty. This (or at least the contrite desire to be so) is a needful qualification for effectual prayer (Ps 24:3, 4). It was a common custom, not only among the Jews, but also among the heathens, to lift up or spread out their arms and hands in prayer.  It is properly the action of entreaty and request; and seems to be an effort to embrace the assistance requested.  But the apostle probably alludes to the Jewish custom of laying their hands on the head of the animal which they brought for a sin-offering, confessing their sins, and then giving up the life of the animal as expiation for the sins thus confessed.  And this very notion is conveyed in the original term epairontav, from airw to lift up, and epi, upon or over.  This shows us how Christians should pray.  They should come to the altar; set God before their eyes; humble themselves for their sins; bring as a sacrifice the Lamb of God; lay their hands on this sacrifice; and by faith offer it to God in their souls’ behalf, expecting salvation through his meritorious death alone.


Without wrath] having no vindictive feeling against any person; harbouring no unforgiving spirit, while they are imploring pardon for their own offences.


And doubting] dialogismou or dialogismwn, as in many MSS., reasonings, dialogues.  Such as are often felt by distressed penitents and timid believers; faith, hope, and unbelief appearing to hold a disputation and controversy in their own bosoms, in the issue of which unbelief ordinarily triumphs.  The apostle therefore wills them to come, implicitly relying on the promises of God, and the sacrifice and mediation of Jesus Christ.


Exodus 28: 2, 40


Verse 2] and thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother for glory and for beauty.


Holy garments] no inherent holiness belonged either to the material or the workmanship. But they are called “holy” simply because they were not worn on ordinary occasions, but assumed in the discharge of the sacred functions (Eze 44:19).


For glory and for beauty] it was grand and sumptuous attire. In material, elaborate embroidery, and color, it had an imposing splendor. The tabernacle being adapted to the infantine aid of the church, it was right and necessary that the priests’ garments should be of such superb and dazzling appearance, that the people might be inspired with a due respect for the ministers as well as THE RITES OF RELIGION. But they had also a further meaning; for being all made of linen, they were symbolical of the truth, purity, and other qualities in Christ that rendered Him such a high priest as became us. Four articles of dress were prescribed for the priests in ordinary, and four more for the high-priest. Those for the priests in general were a coat, drawers, a girdle, and a bonnet.  Besides these the high-priest had a robe, an ephod, a breastplate, and a plate or diadem of gold on his forehead.  The garments, says the sacred historian, were for honour and for beauty.  They were emblematical of the office in which they ministered.  1. It was honorable. They were the ministers of the Most High, and employed by him in transacting the most important concerns between God and his people, concerns in which all the attributes of the Divine Being were interested, as well as those which referred to the present and eternal happiness of his creatures.  2. They were for beauty. They were emblematical of that holiness and purity which ever characterize the Divine nature and the worship which is worthy of him, and which are essentially necessary to all those who wish to serve him in the beauty of holiness here below, and without which none can ever see his face in the realms of glory.  3. Notice that the sanctuary was not a boutique but a holy place and the garments had specific prescriptions not to excite the assembly but to invite them in awe of the Lord hence the mix and much found in the sanctuary today for decency are but a mockery and non-called for competitions. Should not the garments of all those who minister in holy things still be emblematical of the things in which they minister?  Should they not be for glory and beauty, expressive of the dignity of the Gospel ministry, and that beauty of holiness without which none can see the Lord?  As the high-priest’s vestments, under the law, were emblematical of what was to come, should not the vestments of the ministers of the Gospel bear some resemblance of what is come? Is then the dismal black, now worn by almost all kinds of priests and ministers, for glory and for beauty?  Is it emblematical of anything that is good, glorious, or excellent?  How unbecoming the glad tidings announced by Christian ministers are a colour emblematical of nothing but mourning and woe, sin, desolation, and death!  How inconsistent the habit and office of these men! Should it be said, “These are only shadows, and are useless because the substance is come.”  I ask, why then is black almost universally worn? Why is a particular colour preferred, if there be no signification in any?  Is there not a danger that in our zeal against shadows, we shall destroy or essentially change the substance itself?  Would not the same sort of argumentation exclude water in baptism, and bread and wine in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper?  The white surplice in the service of the Church is almost the only thing that remains of those ancient and becoming vestments, which God commanded to be made for glory and beauty. Clothing, emblematical of office, is of more consequence than is generally imagined.  Were the great officers of the crown, and the great officers of justice, to clothe themselves like the common people when they appear in their public capacity, both their persons and their decisions would be soon held in little estimation.




Deuteronomy 22:5

De 22:5 ¶ The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.


Verse 5; the woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man] it is, however, a very good general precept understood literally, and applies particularly to those countries where the dress alone distinguishes between the male and the female.  The close-shaved gentleman may at any time appear like a woman in the female dress, and the woman appear as a man in the male’s attire.  Were this to be tolerated in society, it would produce the greatest confusion.  Clodius, who dressed himself like a woman that he might mingle with the Roman ladies in the feast of the Bona Dea, was universally execrated.


Romans 12:2


Ro 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Eph 1:18; 4:23; 5:10, 17; Col 1:21-22; 3:10; 1Th 4:3; 1Pe 1:14; 1Jo 2:15


Verse 2;   and be not conformed to this world] it may be understood that present state of things both among the Jews and Gentiles; the customs and fashions of the people who then lived, the Gentiles particularly, who had neither the power nor the form of godliness; though some think that the Jewish economy, frequently termed, this world, this peculiar state of things, is alone intended.  And the apostle warns them against reviving usages that Christ had abolished: this exhortation still continues in full force.  The world that now is – THIS present state of things, is as much opposed to the spirit of genuine Christianity as the world then was. Pride, luxury, vanity, extravagance in dress, and riotous living, prevail now, as they did then, and are as unworthy of a Christian’s pursuit as they are injurious to his soul, and hateful in the sight of God.


Be ye transformed] be ye metamorphosed, transfigured, appear as new persons, and with new habits, as God has given you a new form of worship, so that ye serve in the newness of the spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.  The word implies a radical, thorough, and universal change, both outward and inward.  This is thus the force of this word when used in a moral sense. “I perceive myself not to be amended merely, but to be transformed:” i. e entirely renewed.


By the renewing of your mind] let the inward change produce the outward.  Where the spirit, the temper, and disposition of the mind, Eph 4:23, are not renewed, an outward change is of but little worth, and but of short standing.


What a worldly attire is


Above, the Bible tells us not to conform to the standards (styles, fashions, dictates) of this world (Rom 12:1-2). What does this mean? Who defines the “standard of this world” when it comes to dress and adornment? To some people (tribes, races, and nations) some types of dress fashions are acceptable (by anybody and everybody) while in others, the same fashions would be regarded as inappropriate, indecent and immoral. So who defines what is right and wrong, (what is appropriate and an unacceptable) when it comes to dressing codes?


The Bible our yard stick

The Bible is God’s word in human language. If we know and follow it well, we will not go wrong (Mathew 22:29). Knowing God’s word and following it sets us free from our sin (John 8:31-36). It illuminates our ways and paths. [Ps. 119:105]. Any genuine Christian, who wants to do God’s will in terms of dress and fashion, will not go wrong. The trouble with us today is that we do not want to consult the Bible when it comes to our dressing codes. We have adapted worldly styles which are outrageous (shameless, disgraceful) to Christ, the church and our faith. If we followed the Bible we would be careful about our physical appearance.


The Human conscience and our dress codes:

I have heard people say to me in relationship to the type of clothes they put on “my conscience is clear on my fashion. My conscience is clean. In fact the true church is every person’s heart”. Is this type of argument acceptable? Can this type of reasoning stand the test of God’s word? The answer is “NO”. This type of reasoning portrays grave ignorance on what the Bible says about human consciences and hearts. In fact, it is a reasoning that expresses disobedience and rebellion, towards the revealed word of God. Concerning own hearts (human heart) the Bible says “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately corrupt, who can understand it? [Jer 17:9). Our Lord Jesus Christ spoke about our human heart as follows “For from the writhing, out of the heart of a man comes evil thoughts. All these evil things come from within and they defile a man” [Mark 7:21-22].


This is why he never entrusted himself to any person because he knew how evil human hearts are. [John 2:24-25].

About our consciences, we are not safe either. The Bible says, ‘whose consciences are seared” [1 Tim 4:2]. To sear is to burn with hot iron bars, the way pastoralists put marks on their animals. The mark remains for life on those beasts. Our consciences have been killed – made dead by hot irons of sin, such that we cannot discern what is spiritual and worldly. The Bible once again says. “The god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel” [2 Cor. 4:4]


Nakedness and clothing in the Bible

(i)            The Bible and nakedness

The Bible always shows that nakedness is as a result of sin and degradation. It shows that once a person is under control of evil forces, he tends to show his nakedness either passively or actively, regardless of situation and position. Adam and Eve realized that they were naked after they had rebelled against God (Gen 2:17, 3:1-7). In Isaiah 47:1-3 God describes the daughter of Babylon as being in state of nakedness and shame. HER LEGS WERE UNCOVERED. In the New Testament, those possessed by demons usually had very poor or no clothes.


(ii)           Proper clothes identified

The word for clothes (dress) used in the Bible helps us to know what type of a clothing God’s people should walk in. Let us look at some of them.

  1. Isaiah 61:10 the word used here is robe, along a type of dress used to cover the whole body, way down past the knees of both men and women.
  2. Luke 8:35 the demon possessed man used to walk naked. But when the devils were cast out of him by Christ and was in his right mind, he was clothed. The word for cloth here is himatia. Himatia according to Greek experts, was an outer garment, which was wrapped around the body or fastened from shoulders way down and covered the legs, way below the knees”.
  3. Luke 15:22 the prodigal (way ward lost) son wasted all his riches in immoral practices and became so desperate in terms of food. It seems he even did not have good clothes. When he came to his father, repentant and sorrowful, the first thing the man did to his son was to cover him with a white robe. The word for robe here is “stole” stole was “a long robe, from shoulders, covering the body of a person down to the legs. It was worn as a mark of dignity”
  4. 1Peter 3:3 the word used for clothing here is “enduma”. Enduma is translated differently in some verses, e.g. in Mt. 6:25 a garment, 22:11-12 a welding garment. It carries the same biblical meaning a long robe covering the whole human body, legs included.
  5. Rev 3:18 here Jesus counsels the proud and self-righteous church in Laodicea to buy from Him “white garments” to clothe herself so that her nakedness should not be seen. The word for “white garments”. To himatia, long past knee attire.


(iii)         The lesson we learn from the Bible


From the above verses we learn

  • Clothes (dressings) for God’s people should cover the person well, from shoulders way down past the knees. Any clothing for both men and women above the knees is considered inappropriate and indecent.
  • Proper clothing on God’s people is an outward sign of God’s righteousness accepted into the human heart. Any attire that does not cover the human body well but leaves sensitive parts uncovered is an index (indicator) of un-forgiven (un-cleansed) heart, a rebellious mind and intentions controlled by sin.
  • The acceptable attire for God’s people both for men and women therefore, should cover from shoulders way past the knees. To ladies, their breasts, legs above their knees, armpits and chest should be properly covered. Any clothing that does not meet this standard is not appropriate for God’s children, and therefore reveals “Nakedness”


Today’s versions (Dress codes)

  • Today’s fashions are anti-God, anti Christian and anti-the gospel of Christ. They are out rightly meant to promote sexual immorality to both men and women. They do not cover what may be regarded as “sensitive parts of the body and more so to women. Think of unisex clothes, clothes meant to be worn by either men or women. They are an open rebellion against God who made people as males and females, and gave instructions on how they should dress (Deut. 22:5).


Trousers for ladies

  • Wearing of trousers by Christian women is no longer an issue to most of Christians today. In fact some Christians will think it abnormal for a Pastor or church leader to take an issue in relationship to trouser wearing by ladies. How can a person in sound mind talk about trousers as being unfit for Christian ladies in today’s society? The answer is one. “Long pants” as Americans call them, are not meant for God’s fearing ladies. This type of attire does not give due respect to the ladies, whose body shape is quite different from that of men. American Costume is also condemned for God’s people


Men and their dress codes

  • Many times we talk of women dressing poorly. But in most cases men dress very badly as well. In fact some men walk half naked. Think of men whose trousers are very tight, so tight such that their “weapons of war” appear well marked from the outside. Some men (especially the big and fat) walk with their stomachs half covered. Either the shirt they wear does not get tucked into trousers well, or it is too small to cover the stomach. Some other men walk with unzipped trousers before children and women. All these and many more tell both men and women to dress well.




Jewelry and Outward Adornment



Gold tried in fire is faith. The Nile was called a River of life. The ancient Egypt over 3000 years ago in Central Egypt; Howard Carter discovered the tomb of King Tutankhamun. When he unearthed the tomb, he found that it was all gold. The king was dressed in necklaces and the ears were pierced to show that he also wore earrings. He wore much jewelry. On his headdress there were the carvings of a serpent and a vulture. They worshiped the serpent as the giver of life. Blue and gold was also worn on his headdress; blue as the symbol of the moon and gold as the symbol of the sun. There was also the dung beetle with a cross on it back. In his chambers was also the golden throne with two wings serpents as the covering cherubs on the armrests. The king had a blue throne and this is interesting because in the Bible it talks about the God’s throne as being blue in Ezekiel 1:. We also find composite creatures, the head of man, the body of a lion, wings on its back, reminiscent of the counterfeit system that Egypt had as a throne of God. We also find a wheel after a wheel. The dung beetle was also worshiped as a symbol of life giver to the Egyptians and the resurrection; a green stone representing the giving of life; this was one of the greatest insults to God’ truth that fed on the moon. Today the jewelry of ancient is being revived and people are wearing these jewels not knowing that they pointed to the worship of the sun-god or the Devil himself and have invited the spirits to come into their lives and take control. The ancient Egyptians had earrings in the form of the serpent. The rings also in the ancient Egypt revealed the sun-god. They used to place the ring on the faience of the King. It showed where the ring came from; it revolved around fertility, the finger represented male member whilst the ring the female. There was also a loop cross discovered in the King’s tomb. The loop cross represented the male and the female which was a fertility rite and also the giving of life. When one of the royal line died, the cross was place towards the nostril for the assurance of resurrection and eternal life. There was also found the serpent which was the giver of life on earth and the sun-disc as the life giver of heaven all interloped on the cross as the link between the earth and heaven. This was long before the Christian era Remember Jesus was hang on the cross between heaven and earth. This cross and rings are nowadays worn by the group known as the ROCK; a devil-worshiping group and they know very well this things. All this came from pagans who looked at the sun and saw it as a cross. A cross in a Christian life means dying from self and not a literal thing.



In the Euphrates, we find a River that represents the ancient Babylon. When we talk about Babylon, the first person that crosses our minds is Nimrod – the great hunter who rebelled against the teachings of God. He had a queen named Semiramis and she gave birth to illegitimate son after the death of Nimrod who she called Tammuz. Tammuz was called the fertility god in Ezekiel 8:14. The symbol of Tammuz was a cross on the sun-disc. He was born on the 25th of December and he had the fertility animals dedicated to him; at Easter time nine months before the day of his birth; and that’s where we get the Easter egg, and the Easter rabbits. The first letter of Tammuz is T representing the cross and the sun-worship because he was the son of the sun-god. And the cross has now come down to the church today. When Tammuz was killed by a wild boar, the women wept for Tammuz that’s in Ezekiel 8:14; a counterfeit of Jephtha’s daughter in Judges 11:29-20 and the boar became known as the killer of gods and the destroyer of the cross and in different places in the world today, people still worship the boar. Some still commemorate the killing of the boar by serving its head on plate on the Christmas day. When Jesus was hang on the cross, He was made a sacrifice for the Devil himself because the cross was a symbol of pagan-worship and we do not venerate the cross, we venerate Jesus Chris the Son of God not the cross, the symbol of the sun-god. In ancient Egypt, we find again the counterfeit trinity; Horus the god of the sky and the light and goodness; Isis, the queen of heaven and the nature goddess and Osiris the god of the underworld. Today we see the cross everywhere.



We cannot imagine what the Throne of God is like but it must be beautiful. Ezekiel 28:14, 15 gives the glimpse of Heaven and the fall of the Devil and the stones he was decked with. That represented the Glory of God; but he has counterfeited the things of Heaven for self-worship, that’s why Isaiah 3:16-24 talks about how women will be brought low because they have flirted themselves in this Devilish pride and ignorance; and today I tell you, you are no longer in darkness because I have told you this things. In Revelation 12: we read about the war and how the Devil was defeated and his angels and they have been deceiving the Saints all through. In the story of the fall of man we find the Devil used the wing-serpent as the medium to deceive mankind. If you look at the serpent, you see how it is gold-like decked. The hairdressing that we have, decked in gold and coiled some like number six, the secret number of the Devil; all this revolves around paganism and sun-worship. The jewelry that we have in the world today, the ring, the necklace, the bangles all are symbols of the snake, you just need to look closer to that jewelry and you will be shocked for how long you’ve been deceived. If you look at the crescent, you will see six walls representing the moon-goddess. If you have ever seen Monarchy Wilson, one of the leading witches in England today, you will see him wearing the same crescent decked with gold, ring-shaped and they know what it means and where it came from. Remember the golden calf and afterward what God told the Israelites in Exodus 33:5 because the Israelites thought that they still had the protection of the Egyptians gods while they had the ornaments and this angered the Lord that He nearly put Aaron to death but Moses pleaded for their mercy Deuteronomy 9:20. In the communication of the spirits, the Nubians wear this rings and jewelry allover from the head to toe; their nostrils and even the sensitive parts like lips and ears to excite the spirits. Outward adorning appears more than twice in the Bible, to show the Lord’s disapproval of it. 2 Kings 9:30, Isaiah 3:16-24, Jeremiah 4:30, Ezekiel 16:9-19, Ezekiel 27:, 1 Timothy 2:9-10 and 1 Peter 3:1-6 because it all Satan-worship. The Lord is calling as to separate ourselves from the world; to be a distinctive people and to walk in the purity of the heart and not the outward look.


Wedding Ring

The wedding ring has a pagan origin. At the turn of the century, fundamental churches did not have wedding rings in their wedding services. They knew that it represents the fertility god. In paganism, they had three rings which they put on the fingers time at time; and in Roman Catholic Church they do that only in the name of Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. The ring is a symbol of the female finger of the male. In Revelation 17:4, we read about a woman representing the fallen church so much more different from the woman in Revelation 12: all this outward adornment that takes away the true picture of a pious Christian. Paganism entered the church through the Roman Catholic and we find Mary as the queen of Heaven. If you go in St. Peters today in Rome, Mary there called the truth. I am the way the truth and life they are told in the assorted work of Mary and notice the paintings what is one her arms, it’s not the baby Jesus; it’s a golden sun-disc. What is the sun-disc doing there? You may ask yourself; this was the ancient teachings of the sun-worship in the Babylon. Thousands come to see the Pope every year; if you look at his hat closely you notice the fish head-like cap and it is made of gold. It goes back to the worship of the fish-god; and we see the sign of the cross used over and over again and the gold ring on his hand; and when he blesses the people, he makes the cross sign. Notice also the cross on his cross also used by the Nazis. Are the Christians blind to the extent you cant notice all this apostasy and false religion. In Revelation 3:18, we read about the counsel of God; the true adornment. If you study how the Tabernacle in Exodus 26 was built, you find that the outside had no adornment or gold but only the inside; that represents the character of the Christian. Now take a pause and think about Christ, he came and left His Divinity in Heaven and they put a symbol of the Devil on His back, the cross. And eventually took Him and nailed Him on it; Son of God on the symbol of sun-god and Jesus died for me and you to set us free from the symbols of paganism. What a sacrifice He made; how willing are you to give-up that jewelry for the one who gave up his life for you. Study about fiery fire that will blaze the sinners; it is yellow gold-like; giving to sinners back what they sow Galatians 6:7.




It does not take time for a person with a sound mind to know what a worldly attire is. Even children will out rightly point out to a poorly dressed dad or mom. But in short, any dress for ladies that exposes her legs above the knee when sitted, any clothe that exposes chest to the point of the breasts or shoulders, or leaves armpit bear is regarded by Christian standards as unfit and therefore worldly. In addition to these, any attire that reveals the shape of the body for ladies to the public is unacceptable. It is regarded as immoral.


To men, any attire that does not cover their legs below the knees, and does not cover the chest above his breasts is deemed inappropriate; trousers that are too tight, shirts that leave men’s belly open are not decent. They should be rejected. All in all any clothe worn by men or women, that does not reflect the glory of Christ, and the message of salvation, but aims at advertising the wearer is inappropriate. Christians, let us dress ourselves to the glory of God.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *