You wrote:
“Whatever you do, do it unto the Lord.”

Can we do prostitution to the “Lord”? Should we dress like prostitutes to the “Lord”? Maybe so, but it would be the wrong lord.

Shalom

Eric Liddel (remember “Chariots of Fire”) refused to run on Sunday because he thought it was wrong to work on Sabbath. He may have been wrong about what day Sabbath was, but His heart to do what was right in spite of his culture was very commendable. What if an Olympian swimmer was to be disqualified for wearing a truly modest suit or get a slower time to the glory of YHWH?

In the US there is a philosophy that the church should be “culture current.” It is the exact opposite of what the scripture teaches. We are to be in the world but not of it. If we cannot live by YHWH’s ideas and be an Olympian then so be it. Choose who you will serve.

Shalom

What seems to be the qualifier on exposure vs. modestry (covering up) is not whether or not a thigh is shown by the wearing of a nonbikini style woman’s swimsuit, but by what Paul stated in fact about appointed seasons and placements too on Mars Hill. Moslem culture totally covers up, even the face, and justifies it. Does this set right while meeting very strict standards, or does it rattle the sense of freedom, where there is neither male nor female in Christ Jesus?

Women competing in the swim races of the Olympics wear the latest fabric torso covering swimsuits to achieve an extra nonfriction surface level to increase their ability to compete (where a 1/100th of a second can make or break a winning swim lap). Shall we forbid a Christian competitor the edge of such a suit and its provision? Lust, like trust, is both extended and exhibited, where the stimulation to feel such is, like anger, a matter of the heart first and foremost. In these times a full suit, vs. a bikini style suit may be considered moderate. Its intenntion is to permit swiming and sunning, yet not expose private body parts or emphases.

Like the short and long day earth creation religiously sound theories, recognition of room for both the knee to neck coverage and non bikini coverage for the beach can be within the boundaries of current cutural modesty. Otherwise the Ten Commandments would rise to eleven.

The crucifix has been preached against by Anabaptists, Baptists, Puritans, Pentecostals, etc. as a form of idolatry. Of course, the Catholic church maintains that their statues are “icons” not idols and that they are not worshiped. But it all depends on your definition of worship.

It seems that the scripture specifies not to make images to worship them, but does that make it good to make a statue of Jupiter bring it into our house and not worship it. The visible church under the rulership of Popes and other Catholic leaders was brought to do all manner of pagan idolatry. The doctrine of the “ever dying Christ” is more paganism and superstition represented by the crucifix. Protestants have generally used an empty cross to symbolize their faith.

But this is a bit off topic, other than to show that the naked man on the cross is no good reason to accept nudity in public. Marital nudity is obviously good in private. Surely, culture to blame for all manner of undressed people throughout the ages and the world today.

Jabez wrote:

“My point has always been that it is not as simple, in a cultural context and society which is less constant than those of the Tenach or New Testament, to pin down a tight rule on what is and is not modesty.”

It is not too difficult to find the answers in scripture. (Difficult in a cultural context, yes, but in the light of scripture alone it is clear.) If we are always looking at “culture” to determine truth we will be much misled. The shifting sand of “culture” contributes greatly to the mind set that “Man is the measure of all things.” We become fools when we compare ourselves to one another instead of looking into the perfect law of liberty.

There is a counterfeit liberty that would excuse exposed thighs on man or woman. It would excuse the bare breasts of either sex also. This counterfeit liberty often disguises itself in the garb of modern scholarship and intellect. It hides behind the mask of nonjudgmentalism and liberal theology. It is the outcome of man rebelling in the garden. He forsook the tree of life for the opportunity to be his own boss.

We are called to be workers in YHWH’s vineyard, so to speak. Culture does not matter there. Pleasing the master that called us DOES. We can stand by idly and watch the culture’s naked bodies pass by, all the while not knowing which is acceptable and which is not, or we can humbly accept YHWH’s word to be true.

Shalom

Messiah was shamed by being hung on the cross. It was forced upon Him. To bring this up as an argument about modesty is absurd. He is not on the cross any more, but sitting on the right hand of Yahweh.

Heb 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

The depictions of Him on the cross are images. It is forbidden on two counts: 1) it is of a male. 2) it is supposedly of Yahweh

De 4:15 Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the LORD spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire:
16 Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female,

We are not to worship Messiah on the cross, but we are to worship Yahweh in spirit and in truth. These images of Him are against the truth quoted above.

The argument that different cultures have been good or that their expressions of “modest” dress must be taken as any kind of proof is contrary to Scripture. The have FALLEN to these levels. Sinful man’s ideas are not the ideal.

C.S. Lewis was a man. He did not author scripture. He was probably one of the most intelligent men of the century, but he was wrong about some things.

The traditional image of Messiah on the cross has been rejected by many protestant groups. Messiah is not on the cross any more. He died once for all. He is not always dying as the “Catholic” version of Him on the cross symbolizes.